Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

[Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>]

Jesús Guerrero wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:41:32 +0200, Dawid Węgliński <cla@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>   
>> On Sunday 20 of September 2009 00:32:28 Dale wrote:
>>     
>>>> ~arch is for testing ebuilds, not the upstream package
>>>>         
>>> So it would be OK to mark something "stable" even tho portage itself
>>> doesn't work with it?  Sorry, this makes no sense to me.  I run stable
>>> for the most part and having a package that portage depends on that is
>>> not stable just sounds a little like putting the cart before the horse.
>>>
>>> See some of the other replies as to why this is a not so good idea.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-)
>>>       
>> You mix it up. Portage works with python 3.1. If an user switches to
>> python 
>> 3.1 as the main interpreter, it's possible that his own scripts won't
>> work. 
>>     
>
> Yes?
>
> # eselect python set 2
> # emerge -s foo
>   File "/usr/bin/emerge", line 41
>     except PermissionDenied, e:
>                            ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>
>
> Ummm, yes, it works *beautifully*, you see. Nothing else to add.
>
>   
>> Marking it stable sometine in november give's some time to ebuilds 
>> maintainers to fix their python based apps just like it's done with gcc 
>> stabilization.
>>     
>
> That's not the usual case. In Gentoo we have a serious policy of not
> marking as stable things until it has passed one month without any serious
> bug report about it. And you are proposing to break this rule for a core
> piece of the OS, right, wonderful. 
>
> Instead I say, first fix the stuff, and then we can start planning the
> switch to 3.1
>
>   

My point exactly.  No package, especially a core package that portage
depends on, should just be thrown into the tree and just assume that it
will work for everyone else. 

Dale

:-)  :-)