Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Add repoman check to warn if src_prepare/src_configure are used in EAPI 0/1

[Tom Wijsman]

On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 23:59:11 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:

> we have a bugzilla workflow doc posted which we'll merge once git is
> back up. please do not reassign portage bugs to yourself.  instead,
> set the status to INPROGRESS.

Okay, I will comment there later; since I now have a whole other vision
of the bug workflow in my head due being asked to do this, I rather see
the resulting workflow as more handy than the posted workflow doc.

As a side note, those changes were with permission suggested by dol-sen.

> > While vapier's case could be considered as valid; I think we should
> > consider that as a bad practice, as one could just as well put the
> > if inside a phase which is the much more common practice.
>
> certainly, but we need to notify the dev community first

+1

> we probably should just use dev branches in the main repo, at least
> for people who have write access to the repo
> 	dev/$USERNAME/<whatever you want>

To be more clear, which one? g.o.g.o, GitHub or is one of both fine?

The suggested naming sounds good to me, I suggest we document that.

> >         r'\s*src_(configure|prepare)\s*\(\)'
> >
> > You can then proceed further and move the re outside:
>
> the idea was to walk a balance between simplicity and
> maintainability.  imo, the fixed version above is the best.

What about the latter improvements about the parentheses?

Yes, I agree that de-duplicating 're' is an overkill change with no
benefit other than some non-measured performance; but, the latter
changes contain a benefit in more correct matching of the parentheses.

> > > the regex is naive and can match valid ebuilds.  consider ones
> > > that handle $EAPI itself and will call the right funcs as
> > > necessary.
> >
> > From a QA point of view it seems more preferable to move away from
> > old EAPIs, than to conditionally support them. The common case is
> > that ebuilds move from older to newer EAPI and thus would get these
> > functions as they get to a newer EAPI.
> >
> > Is there an actual case for downgrading back to an older EAPI?
> >
> > If not, conditional code that checks $EAPI has no purpose.
>
> and yet it exists today.

Does that existence mean it has an actual purpose? Or is it just there?

> as long as portage supports an EAPI, i see no reason to omit useful
> checks like this. -mike

Repeating my original question in different words: Why is it useful?

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@g.o
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D