Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] pre/post phase hooks for users

[Jason Stubbs]

On Saturday 15 October 2005 07:05, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 05:02:02PM -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> > Jason, your thoughts on this 53 wise?
>
> Bleh, pardon, meant .54 for inclussion

Just to be sure it's clear to everybody (although I think Brian knows 
already), my job is not to approve or disapprove of any particular change to 
any particular release. If you want to put a title on it, it'd simply be 
called "release executor". Hence, the answer to the above question really 
lies in the outcome of the .54 thread. The only small perk is that any 
suggestions I might have on the release process are quick to be 
integrated. ;)

So, if it's just my input that is being sought after I do have a couple of 
concerns, specifically related to this bit below:

On Tuesday 11 October 2005 17:05, Brian Harring wrote:
> That said, their will be an exemption for java ebuilds due to the fact
> that they're blocked by ebuild.sh env handling- they need ebd for
> things to work properly, and in the meantime this gives them a method
> to have things work properly.  Downside is that the pre/post hooks are
> not available for users for java ebuilds.

Why exactly would their be an exemption for java ebuilds? Are the hooks 
intended to be used with ebuild packaging as well as by users? Wouldn't new 
or altered phases serve ebuild packaging better? If it is for ebuild 
packaging, wouldn't the EAPI need to change? If it's not for ebuild 
packaging, again why the exemption?

On the user side of things, will the hooks continue on into later versions? 
Specifically, with 3.0 supporting hooks on the python side will the bash 
hooks be deprecated? It seems reasonable that both can coexist nicely, so 
this is more just confirmation then anything.

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list