Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] repoman: add a mini framework for checking eclasses, and fill it out
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 21:14:55
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] repoman: add a mini framework for checking eclasses, and fill it out by Zac Medico
1 On Wednesday 23 May 2012 15:52:11 Zac Medico wrote:
2 > On 05/23/2012 12:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
3 > > Rather than copying & pasting the same behavior for the different eclass
4 > > checks, add a common class for them to extend. This makes adding more
5 > > eclass checks trivial, and keeps down bitrot.
6 > >
7 > > This does abuse the checking interface slightly -- the eclass will change
8 > > its category between unused and missing based on the checks.
9 > >
10 > > URL:
11 > > URL:
12 >
13 > It's fragile to keep all of these eclass interface definitions hardcoded
14 > in python. For example, the _comprehensive checks are going to start
15 > triggering repoman warnings every time that we add a new function to an
16 > eclass.
18 yes, that's why i picked only ones that are simple/stable
20 > If we keep the eclass interface definitions in the tree with the
21 > eclasses, then it will solve this problem, and it will also be possible
22 > for overlays to fork eclasses and tweak interfaces.
24 if we're going to merge them, might as well do it once rather than still
25 having this problem, but reduced. if i extended the framework to parse the
26 syntax used for documenting the eclass, the problem is reduced to "maintainers
27 that fail to fully document their interfaces will hit problems". but i think
28 that's a good hammer to hit eclass maintainers with.
29 -mike


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