On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Hi guys, [...] > So I know a bunch of people have already looked at it, and I'd like to > know: what do you find better about the Ruby approach compared to the > Python approach? Is it just the size of python.eclass, or are there a > number of other issues? > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan > >
Let´s start by agreeing with the complexity of the Python eclass. And a heavy change right now, is going to be painful to say the least because a great deal of packages have been adapted to work the way the eclass works right now. I agree with Grobian in what he said about the coding style of the python.eclass, and would love to see that "fixed". I also agree with the redundancy of some variables and I think just using PYTHON_DEPEND should be sufficient to let the PM know what should be done with a specific package. With python-updater, well, some time ago Ali Polatel implemented some approaches to get rid of python-updater, by exporting some variable in ebuilds that needed to be rebuilt when new python versions were installed. I dont recall what happened with that, but we could think of some ways to finally get rid of python-updater. WRT python3, I too believe it is important to have it stable. Thing is, for better or worse, upstream have it stable, and py2 and py3 are going to co-exist for a long time. Thing is, we should really figure out a way to have it stop messing things up. I believe with a proper dependency handling in the eclass, we could get this to work. As I said it already, we could start doing things simpler in the current python.eclass and maybe that would attract some devs to help out with it, as they find it more comfortable to work with. Best regards, -- Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) Gentoo Developer
