From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-49091-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1Rg5sH-000864-9c
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:37:45 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B040E21C17C;
	Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:37:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com (mail-yx0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039CA21C168
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:37:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by yenm3 with SMTP id m3so8168619yen.40
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 18:37:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=X4Gt+ZQ3JPgL40LCpuW3RMW5xD+3NYEndapZFlejUYk=;
        b=Yw1WgA1MhSqZV3tppg9Itj+DRmvf3fzTCrrQ6p7lh10qNeefNai2vJ1m9pxiJjLBz/
         agg10KUZiPtE67KnDPeyoqpKblP4xdrBxEeuuv2cxPvzKe2pclMPX1/sfD1y4TOCD30N
         25y6MtuEip+htJ+IYw7XN0guEPnJ/L6Q7Yx6I=
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.165.98 with SMTP id d62mr45595185yhl.15.1325126227464;
 Wed, 28 Dec 2011 18:37:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.236.75.200 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 18:37:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EFB6C24.1070307@gentoo.org>
References: <CAD6zcDzTL2LeEwe-DRyH7b=UqBm+7TJ1xMgz_Nb0zQiuzkuNnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EFB6C24.1070307@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:37:07 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD6zcDwraGKaqcvGVHihomWW-FYoy3fF4KACoBmbnQHVy5h+iA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Versioning of eclasses and possibly functions inside ebuilds
From: Francesco Riosa <vivo75@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 3afd15e4-7e82-4bbc-aebb-fc713342eefe
X-Archives-Hash: a55eceee766f7512dac22450aa0e47a6

2011/12/28 Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org>:
> On 12/28/2011 05:12 AM, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>> Seem to me that append a time slice to the function, in the name or as
>> a parent function that call the underling function can solve most of
>> the versioning/deprecation problems
>
> I've overheard Arfrever discussing a similar approach in funtoo's irc
> channel, where the ebuild would set a variable prior to inherit if it
> wants to use a specific eclass API. For the python eclass, he's planning
> to have ebuilds set the PYTHON_ECLASS_API variable to use the new API.
> When the variable is unset, the eclass will default to the older API.

There is a fundamental difference, with "timeslices" it's not the
ebuild that select the implementation but the point in time it's used,
or the user forcing a fake time. From what I've read Artfever approach
require changes in every ebuild and keeping old functions forever. On
the other hand it may be risky to change the preferred interface from
the eclass and not the ebuild.

Thanks for reviewing,
Francesco