| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Chris White wrote: |
| 5 |
> Hi, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> While doing some documenting on what functions needed to be documented |
| 8 |
> for the API documentation project, I found that portage.py seems to be |
| 9 |
> quite a "dumping ground" for functions: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> http://www.gen2net.net/portage-doc/portage.py |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I think it would be nice to split some of the classes out ( yah yah, |
| 14 |
> I'll make patches ;( ). If someone has already mentioned this, feel |
| 15 |
> free to beat me solid with the cluebat ;). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
One thing to consider is that much of the code in portage.py used to be reliant on the portage.settings and portage.db global variables. I've migrated most of the code (maybe all) to work without these globals. For example, emerge and repoman can now run with portage.init_legacy_globals() disabled. In order to maintain backward compatibility for users of the portage module, things that previously relied on the global variables will probably need to remain in portage.py. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
You may be able to find some things that don't rely on those globals and those would be the easier to split out while maintaining compatibility. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Zac |
| 22 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 23 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
iD8DBQFEv74+/ejvha5XGaMRAuu3AJ9MhxfjLdQ/s4/jxPQmjjYhajk87QCfWQSv |
| 26 |
dPjZ4O5yjo0+jk93mmYEpwo= |
| 27 |
=zGcH |
| 28 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives