On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:51:39 -0400
Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 5:30 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Fixed naming the proper default sub-phase and declaring 'edefault'
> > in python_prepare_all().
> > ---
> 
> I think I prefer to explicitly name the function I want to call, so I
> don't really see any great benefit here. I'm not strongly opposed to
> it, but I don't see myself using it either.
> 
> Also, how would this interact with other eclasses which may define a
> similar "edefault" function? Packages using distutils-r1 don't often
> utilize other phase-happy eclasses, but I'm sure it will happen
> eventually.

Well, the idea is that 'edefault' is defined by the eclass inventing
the particular sub-phase. So if sub-phase A calls sub-phase B
indirectly (trough the eclass and so on), edefault points to B
eventually.

Other thing would be, that after returning to A edefault will be no
longer defined. That's fixable though, if ever needed.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny