public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeremy Olexa <darkside@gentoo.org>
To: <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] EAPI={3,4} offset-prefix semantics mandatory?
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:55:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <312bc88834c8c0efb776b307cdb8ee7e@jolexa.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091215185944.GA9600@gentoo.org>


On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:59:44 +0100, Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org>
wrote:
> With the current route where EAPI=3 will simply be EAPI=2 +
> offset-prefix support, and EAPI=4 will be EAPI=3 + some other stuff, the
> following question arose:
> 
>   Should an ebuild using an EAPI that has offset-prefix support make the
>   use of that support mandatory or optional?

As a Gentoo Linux developer, I certainly wouldn't want to say that my
EAPI-3+ ebuilds are guaranteed to work on Gentoo Prefix platforms without
testing(keywording) it.

As a Gentoo Prefix user, I certainly wouldn't want devs that don't know
how to test an ebuild to work on Gentoo Prefix to say that it works.
As a Gentoo Prefix developer, I certainly don't want to fix bugs by people
that don't know how test on (or have access to) Gentoo Prefix.

In the end, every Gentoo Prefix arch needs a specific keyword anyway.
Unless that changes, I can't say that I see many benefits to making
offset-prefix support mandatory in EAPI-3. OTOH, if it is mandatory and I
screw it up for Gentoo Prefix platforms, no one will know until it gets
keyworded (and hence tested).

-Jeremy


> In other words, one can perfectly fine write an ebuild EAPI=3 that will
> not work in an offset-prefix install, due to improper absence of
EPREFIX,
> ED and EROOT.  Should we allow this formally, or not?
> 
> Why is this a problem?  Simply because it can be done, but more because
> EAPI=4 will introduce features a developer would like to use/rely on,
> while she/he does not want, or is not able to write the ebuild in a
> Prefix conforming way.
> 
> The pros for forcing ebuilds to be offset-prefix aware are:
> - an ebuild having EAPI >= 3 (as it looks now) is supposed to work
>   for Prefix users
> - hence also obviously is (supposed to be) checked for Prefix
> - repoman might be able to check for obvious mistakes regarding
>   offset-prefix installations
> 
> The cons:
> - all developers need to be aware of how Prefix works, and be able to
>   write ebuilds for it (I can post all the answers to the Prefix quiz)
> - basically requires a Prefix to be setup to test
> - it will stop developers to some degree to use higher EAPIs in the
>   worst case
> 
> The pros for allowing ebuilds that have an offset-prefix aware EAPI to
> ignore the offset-prefix are:
> - easy drop-in replacement for devs, basically the contra of all the
>   cons of the previous approach.
> 
> The cons:
> - not immediately clear which ebuild is offset-prefix aware (could look
>   at Prefix keywords)
> - needs proper rules; an ebuild that has offset-prefix support may not
>   have this support removed again (breaks Prefix users, how to enforce?)
> - ebuilds may get offset-prefix support at a later stage, which may not
>   entirely be understood/noticed by (their maintaining) devs
> 
> Please voice your opinion and share your insights, if any.



      parent reply	other threads:[~2009-12-17  0:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-15 18:59 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] EAPI={3,4} offset-prefix semantics mandatory? Fabian Groffen
2009-12-15 19:42 ` Ulrich Mueller
2009-12-16  6:29 ` Peter Volkov
2009-12-16  8:48   ` Fabian Groffen
2009-12-16 22:18     ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
2009-12-16 22:55 ` Jeremy Olexa [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=312bc88834c8c0efb776b307cdb8ee7e@jolexa.net \
    --to=darkside@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox