Re: [gentoo-python] To refactor python-distutils-ng or introduce distutils-r1?

[Michał Górny]

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:16:10 +0800
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote:

> On 26 September 2012 21:16, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'd like to bring a quick topic, preferably answered yes/no, preferably
> > after reading the remaining part ;).
> >
> > Considering that python-r1 patches so far are clean, should I:
> >
> > a) integrate python-distutils-ng with python-r1 and change its API
> >    as listed below (the API changes don't collide with any used
> >    functionality),
> >
> > b) leave python-distutils-ng in place and work on distutils-r1 with
> >    a clean start.
> >
> >
> > And now what changes in API will be necessary to make p-d-ng play nice
> > with python-r1. I've assumed that functions prefixed with an underscore
> > are private and didn't care about them.
> >
> > None of the listed features are used by any ebuild in the tree, unless
> > I have missed something ;).
> >
> > 1. Remove PYTHON_OPTIONAL -- I really dislike the way it is done
> >    (it's practically a switch to hardwire 'python?' in a few places,
> >    without any flexibility);
> >
> > 2. Convert PYTHON_COMPAT to an array -- this will usually mean that
> >    ebuilds can't look up ${PYTHON_COMPAT} safely (the change is done
> >    for practical reasons);
> >
> > 3. Stop passing Python ABI and executable as parameters to phase
> >    functions -- these are not really useful (since they are available
> >    as ${EPYTHON} and ${PYTHON} anyway. Removing them will allow me to
> >    implement a 'foreach' function being able to pass arbitrary
> >    parameters to invoked commands.
> >
> > What do you think? Should I change p-d-ng ABI like that (errr, how I
> > hate that name) or just introduce a new eclass?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Michał Górny
>
> Sorry for the (relatively) late reply. I was very busy this week.

No problem, I remembered your vote from the last time we spoke :).

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny