Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: sam@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] go-module.eclass: deprecate EGO_SUM and call ego instead of go
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 21:55:39
Message-Id: Yh6WUSsg5+dxWqE0@linux1.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] go-module.eclass: deprecate EGO_SUM and call ego instead of go by Sam James
1 On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 09:03:52PM +0000, Sam James wrote:
2 >
3 >
4 > > On 27 Feb 2022, at 04:38, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
5 > >
6 > > EGO_SUM can be thousands of lines long in ebuilds, and it leads to
7 > > creating Manifest files that are thousands of lines long.
8 > > It has been determined that vendor tarballs are a better solution if
9 > > upstream doesn't vendor their dependencies.
10 > >
11 > > Also, call the ego helper function instead of calling go directly.
12 > >
13 > > Signed-off-by: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
14 > > ---
15 >
16 > Per comments on IRC, I suggest not removing the EGO_SUM
17 > examples for now until we've got good documentation and tooling
18 > for vendor stuff, and a transition period is completed.
19
20 I would rather not keep the EGO_SUM documentation. I do not want any
21 new ebuilds coming into the tree using it.
22
23 I am willing to flag EGO_SUM as deprecated if a variable can be flagged
24 as deprecated; that is what I'm looking up now.
25
26 William

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] go-module.eclass: deprecate EGO_SUM and call ego instead of go Anna Vyalkova <cyber+gentoo@×××××.in>