From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C74F5139083 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 23:59:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D6B48E0DDE; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 23:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E337E0DD7 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 23:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C6C73415B7 for ; Sun, 9 Apr 2017 23:59:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Reverse use of Python/Ruby versions To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20170409152002.550f3b4d.dolsen@gentoo.org> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <0cf71d18-64f3-821b-e481-9889f5eb1872@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 19:59:22 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 293ac0a9-6c7a-4f76-851a-db41329657d6 X-Archives-Hash: d3708f9e06316162f562ac525c510499 On 04/09/2017 07:15 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > If the package failed, all that would need to be done kinda like now is > a given variable modified in the ebuild. Just marking what ever it did > not work with. As mentioned that could be done via my > ebuild-batcher[1], though same functionality is easily replicated. > How do you plan to test a thousand packages against the new version of python, and then revision/stabilize all of the broken ones immediately? Or is the plan to just break everyone's systems, and ask them to report bugs for the things that stopped working? I think what you will actually get as a result is that nobody will ever add a new version of python to the tree, because you've just made it a huge ordeal to do so.