1 |
On pią, 2017-05-12 at 13:20 +0700, Alex Turbov wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > Hi, |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > Few janitorial notes for a start: |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > 1. please fix your line wrapping since your messages are wrapped twice |
9 |
> > now, and it's really hard to read with single words on every second |
10 |
> > line; |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> |
13 |
> sorry, I don't understand what are you talking about... probably some |
14 |
> problem with your email client (or whatever you use). |
15 |
> I'm using gmail's web UI and see no double wraps... |
16 |
|
17 |
Example from your e-mail (I've added empty lines to prevent gmail from |
18 |
pretending it's fine): |
19 |
|
20 |
| that my primary (and default) Python version is 3.5 and I have some 2.7 |
21 |
|
22 |
| packages |
23 |
|
24 |
| (ebuilds) only because they required by something else (really important to |
25 |
|
26 |
| me). |
27 |
|
28 |
Plus, please disable HTML mail. It is possible that this will also fix |
29 |
text mail format. |
30 |
|
31 |
> > You can't use python_targets directly since it will break when the old |
32 |
> > implementations are disabled (and also make it PITA for others to add |
33 |
> > new impls). |
34 |
> > |
35 |
> |
36 |
> Ok, what I can use instead? |
37 |
|
38 |
No solution for the moment. I have some idea though, and I will shortly |
39 |
reply to your original e-mail on it. |
40 |
|
41 |
> > Long story short, it's not worth the effort. |
42 |
> > |
43 |
> > Yes, most of the time people specify PYTHON_USEDEP on sphinx needlessly. |
44 |
> > There are two other major cases when you need it though: |
45 |
> > |
46 |
> > 1. things like autointerface that interface with packages' code, |
47 |
> > |
48 |
> |
49 |
> what are you talking about? ( |
50 |
> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/repoze.sphinx.autointerface/ ??) |
51 |
|
52 |
Yes, that one. There could possibly be more. |
53 |
|
54 |
> > 2. and packages calling sphinx via 'python /usr/bin/sphinx ...' (i.e. |
55 |
> > requiring impl match between python in use and sphinx). |
56 |
> > |
57 |
> |
58 |
> do you mean they are doing it from ebuild? |
59 |
|
60 |
More often from Makefile or setup.py, or any other wrapper that we have |
61 |
no direct control of. |
62 |
|
63 |
> > However, tracking the other uses down and figuring them is not worth |
64 |
> > the effort. In the end, someone will probably add it back thinking |
65 |
> > someone must've missed it. It's too hard to get it right. |
66 |
> > |
67 |
> |
68 |
> I didn't get what are you talking about... |
69 |
|
70 |
I mean that it's highly probable that some other developer seeing |
71 |
dependency on dev-python/sphinx without PYTHON_USEDEP will readd it, |
72 |
thinking that the developer missed it by mistake. |
73 |
|
74 |
> |
75 |
> |
76 |
> > Building Sphinx with less implementations than its reverse dependencies |
77 |
> > is a corner case. It's not really worth spending hours making sure |
78 |
> > depends are 100% strictly correct. The more important goal is to have |
79 |
> > things working reliably, and overspecified deps are reliable, i.e. |
80 |
> > packages won't fail to build because of them. |
81 |
> > |
82 |
> > |
83 |
> |
84 |
> Ok, seems I've got your point of view, but can't agree w/ it... Well, I |
85 |
> would fight alone w/ it |
86 |
> |
87 |
|
88 |
Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to accepting fixes if you want to work |
89 |
on them. I'm just saying you can expect an uphill battle, and not much |
90 |
of help. |
91 |
|
92 |
-- |
93 |
Best regards, |
94 |
Michał Górny |