On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:47:09 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> i implemented eclass checking for some of the most common ones in the tree, > but Zac didn't particularly care for the maintaining of lists of functions > used by eclasses directly in repoman (due to the concern of them getting out > of sync). > > so the proposal is to utilize the existing eclass documentation markers to > extract the complete list of functions provided by an eclass. the upside is > the metadata stays current, and we can scale better to all eclasses w/out > requiring manual intervention. the downside is that if people don't properly > document their eclasses, repoman might throw false positives (warnings, not > errors) about unused eclasses being inherited, and will miss throwing errors > when functions are used but the respective eclasses aren't inherited. > > however, i think that's a good hammer to throw at eclass maintainers to keep > their documentation up-to-date and accurate. any other opinions/feedback ? Is there any sane way to handle sub-eclasses? eg. foo-base inherits foo-functions. I have some crazy ideas on how to do eclass versioning I may one day threaten the world with if they ever let me out of my padded cell. -- fonts, gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
