-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 29/09/12 09:49 AM, hasufell wrote: > On 09/29/2012 12:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 11:20:31 +0100 Markos Chandras >> <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >>> >>> On 09/29/2012 09:53 AM, Micha? Górny wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Instead of the floating patches and p-d-ng modifications I >>>> sent earlier, here are the two complete (so far, well, >>>> initial :P) eclasses for review. >>>> >>>> They are designed as 'mostly' drop-in python-distutils-ng >>>> replacement. >>>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Are you saying that you are going to remove the >>> python-distutils-ng eclass in favour of the new eclasses? I >>> don't quite understand the reasons to be honest. > >> The reason is simple -- I can't fix it without changing the API. >> Changing the API on a live eclass is confusing, and considering >> that it is not used by many packages, it's easier to lastrite >> it. > >> Also, this fixes the name not to have any '-ng' nor '-ds9'. > > > What are the reasons to change the API in the first place? There > has to be a good reason, cause this will involve yet another > migration of many ebuilds. I don't see any bugreports. > > I fear this will cause more confusion, i.e. some ebuilds using the > old distutils, some using python-distutils-ng and some using > distutils-r1 resulting in weird tree behavior. >
Given that at present, distutils-r1 and python-distutils-ng have identical end-results, I think that the introduction of distutils-r1 to the tree should also involve a sed against all the existing ebuilds using python-distutils-ng to move them to the new eclass. Then python-distutils-ng only needs to remain to support overlays. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlBnA1YACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBtCgD/UXW804+tsTOnI0RtfWfhiewK a0W9DXplPRprWYZg4mQBAIWbRf+AJDrIqGvELiwt3p0FXChbCYypHDmm3tb8ljxL =isBB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
