On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:55:37 +0200 hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Currently you seem to have focused more on distutils when writing > python-r1 which makes this eclass a bit raw. > Waiting for other developers to file feature requests instead of > figuring out those yourself before they even consider porting their > ebuild to your new eclasses seems like a questionable policy to me. > They might not be too excited about it to start discussions and > feature requests just to switch from an already working implementation. As you may have failed to notice, most of Python packages actually are using distutils. Thus, the core goal for distutils-r1/python-r1 was to correctly support those packages. Now that distutils is supported well, I can start thinking about supporting random hackish build systems. I will review redshift and give you my thoughts. Just note that your attitude is not motivating at all. I haven't killed any of your kitten or forced anyone to use python-r1. Most of you didn't even care to give a single word of feedback throughout the development process, so your position of 'this eclass doesn't give me shiny functions I want' is at least impolite. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
