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 B02DB139694 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:45:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3B3AB21C112; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:44:52 +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 CD95821C08A for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:44:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.100.0.22] (host-37-191-236-118.lynet.no [37.191.236.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: k_f) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A282133BEBE for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:44:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424 References: <20170316093806.31977-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> <20170320083544.GZ24205@vapier> <22735.42420.523393.768428@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20170320121937.7fc31770@gentoo.org> <22735.58203.928628.654288@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20170320180140.66dbef67@gentoo.org> <22736.11456.309687.967555@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <89c42e1b-2599-2303-63f1-071b2d17bac1@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Kristian Fiskerstrand Message-ID: <263d36db-1a1f-3570-951c-de3312756ed0@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:43:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 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: <89c42e1b-2599-2303-63f1-071b2d17bac1@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dpJ8SpxNFNnTuoQJ3tjhMj0x5dGTKvcF2" X-Archives-Salt: 6e874367-2fe1-4009-a091-e172e03c886d X-Archives-Hash: 1d29e2046427318f8fe9861d52d2fea6 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --dpJ8SpxNFNnTuoQJ3tjhMj0x5dGTKvcF2 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="wiG2gqf488mXTocDIpQPNEqsMFSQ0H5g1" From: Kristian Fiskerstrand Reply-To: k_f@gentoo.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <263d36db-1a1f-3570-951c-de3312756ed0@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424 References: <20170316093806.31977-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> <20170320083544.GZ24205@vapier> <22735.42420.523393.768428@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20170320121937.7fc31770@gentoo.org> <22735.58203.928628.654288@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20170320180140.66dbef67@gentoo.org> <22736.11456.309687.967555@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <89c42e1b-2599-2303-63f1-071b2d17bac1@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <89c42e1b-2599-2303-63f1-071b2d17bac1@gentoo.org> --wiG2gqf488mXTocDIpQPNEqsMFSQ0H5g1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03/21/2017 09:28 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > In general, the concept of code-sharing common blocks of logic between = multiple > ebuilds in a specific package directory that is not a top-level eclass = is not > entirely without merit. But the only way this idea can be realized in = a > suitable manner and be used by far more consumers than today's eblits a= re, is > to either find and finish the old elibs GLEP or start one over from scr= atch, > submit whatever needs submitting via patches to at least PMS and Portag= e, work > through whatever processes are required for approval, and then deploy i= t in the > next EAPI. >=20 > If anyone is game for working something up or discussing further, let m= e know. I personally fail to see good reasons to have a separate approach for this instead of putting it in the eclass framework. However this might simply mean I'm missing something in the discussion. Before restarting such a GLEP process; maybe a simple pros and cons list of comparison of the future eblit use and existing eclass structure could be helpful? (along with more description of the differences) --=20 Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 --wiG2gqf488mXTocDIpQPNEqsMFSQ0H5g1-- --dpJ8SpxNFNnTuoQJ3tjhMj0x5dGTKvcF2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEtOrRIMf4mkrqRycHJQt6/tY3nYUFAljQ57kACgkQJQt6/tY3 nYXudQf/Zm4V4YO0Pfghg0U1Lzh5DiUyxkOG74l89Jgz0o3XHoWdMbPpxE+CMGST mi3cM3z5SaqN5dfE1+nEyOwqnHsb4bsc7rjG1eLjwU04G6047w/Rxr3S6TG69dzy wtUEjF0S8ysJcUFDOmSCxgYD0xxEKIWT/ny5wpckpzhbV43zUnn6gdkwxGTQM24G g+f6vSETh5IqsjL+tlSUOxI/3E8MY2eZGiJNuMR4/ipnkvBa7AgM3WgKrlLkqaVP 9mKbTsAbkhwelSQYMe7T76y+e9dwpIfG9yTlZem3peK00J120pazl5aaexx/lPzk EYPS6jjiIgVrRcK1HCnsSPHNhwfrSw== =Dxjh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dpJ8SpxNFNnTuoQJ3tjhMj0x5dGTKvcF2--