Archives
Archives
| From: | Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | Gentoo Dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o> | ||
| Subject: | [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH FIXED] Introduce edefault() as a friendly default sub-phase wrapper. | ||
| Date: | Sat, 11 May 2013 15:51:52 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAJ0EP409xtiOGLPGkmWKB5LS1GQQ1+7N4KeYH4w1cZsnKmvKtQ@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-dev] [PATCH FIXED] Introduce edefault() as a friendly default sub-phase wrapper. by "Michał Górny" |
||
| 1 | On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 5:30 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | > Fixed naming the proper default sub-phase and declaring 'edefault' |
| 3 | > in python_prepare_all(). |
| 4 | > --- |
| 5 | |
| 6 | I think I prefer to explicitly name the function I want to call, so I |
| 7 | don't really see any great benefit here. I'm not strongly opposed to |
| 8 | it, but I don't see myself using it either. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Also, how would this interact with other eclasses which may define a |
| 11 | similar "edefault" function? Packages using distutils-r1 don't often |
| 12 | utilize other phase-happy eclasses, but I'm sure it will happen |
| 13 | eventually. |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH FIXED] Introduce edefault() as a friendly default sub-phase wrapper. | "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH FIXED] Introduce edefault() as a friendly default sub-phase wrapper. | Ralph Sennhauser <sera@g.o> |