From: Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: python@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] python-utils-r1.eclass: _python_impl_supported, forward compat
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 14:50:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMiTYSq9i=yduorYSnvWNzGp=+03Eg91LjhjU7UWFfKvh=xGSw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1493755704.1420.4.camel@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2162 bytes --]
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On wto, 2017-05-02 at 12:11 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On wto, 2017-05-02 at 11:49 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> > > > Add forward compatibility up to python3.9. It's helpful to allow some
> > > > flexibility in ebuild PYTHON_COMPAT settings, for third-party
> > > > repositories that may be used with multiple snapshots of the gentoo
> > > > repository.
> > > > ---
> > > > eclass/python-utils-r1.eclass | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/eclass/python-utils-r1.eclass b/eclass/python-utils-r1.
> > >
> > > eclass
> > > > index 66a359e..997a994 100644
> > > > --- a/eclass/python-utils-r1.eclass
> > > > +++ b/eclass/python-utils-r1.eclass
> > > > @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ _python_impl_supported() {
> > > > python2_7|python3_[456]|jython2_7)
> > > > return 0
> > > > ;;
> > > > - pypy1_[89]|pypy2_0|python2_[56]|python3_[123])
> > > > + pypy1_[89]|pypy2_0|python2_[56]|python3_[123789])
> > > > return 1
> > > > ;;
> > > > pypy|pypy3)
> > >
> > > Sounds like a very bad idea. How can you even think of adding
> > > an implementation if you don't know what the eclass API for it would
> be?
> > >
> >
> > For my use case, we're adding python3_6 to PYTHON_COMPAT, and still using
> > those ebuilds with older snapshots of the gentoo repository from a few
> > months back (as well as newer snapshots). So, there's really no danger in
> > my case.
> >
> > With my suggested change, the eclass doesn't make any API guarantees.
> > Where's the harm?
>
> Unless I'm missing something, this is going to cause the eclass to
> accept (and ignore) accidental use of python3_7. It's confusing, to say
> the least.
>
> If you really want to do weird stuff, you're on your own.
Okay, I've sent a new patch that adds a PYTHON_IMPLS_NO_STRICT variable.
--
Thanks,
Zac
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3212 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-02 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-02 18:49 [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] python-utils-r1.eclass: _python_impl_supported, forward compat Zac Medico
2017-05-02 19:01 ` Michał Górny
2017-05-02 19:11 ` Zac Medico
2017-05-02 20:08 ` Michał Górny
2017-05-02 21:50 ` Zac Medico [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='CAMiTYSq9i=yduorYSnvWNzGp=+03Eg91LjhjU7UWFfKvh=xGSw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=zmedico@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=python@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