| 1 |
Dnia 2014-08-30, o godz. 14:54:45 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I've got an item for the agenda myself: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> mgorny started a thread about the future of dohtml on gentoo-dev [1]. |
| 7 |
> Nobody has spoken up in favour of keeping the function. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> So, I am asking the council to discuss and vote on the following |
| 10 |
> questions: |
| 11 |
> - Should dohtml be banned from the package manager? |
| 12 |
> - If yes, what would be the time frame? We could ban it in EAPI 6 |
| 13 |
> already. Alternatively, we could deprecate it now and ban it in some |
| 14 |
> later EAPI. |
| 15 |
> - Do we need a substitute in an eclass? (Note that dohtml in Portage |
| 16 |
> is written in Python, so it would have to be rewritten from |
| 17 |
> scratch.) |
| 18 |
> - If the answer to the first question is no: Should einstalldirs in |
| 19 |
> EAPI 6 use dodoc -r for HTML_DOCS, instead of dohtml? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
We should also decide how to prepare developers for the change. I think |
| 22 |
we could enable warnings for skipped files in earlier EAPIs -- if EAPI |
| 23 |
6 will not provide any direct replacement for dohtml, developers may |
| 24 |
already start replacing it with dodoc. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Michał Górny |
Archives