Re: [gentoo-dev] Reverse use of Python/Ruby versions

["William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1427 bytes --]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 22:43:18 +0200
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> The difference is in quality expectations. We did Python this way to
> make sure things will work, and all obvious breakage will immediately
> be caught. Your alternative does not provide for that.

Add a new Java version and recompiling packages with it, will also
immediately show breakage if any.

If your saying Python code is of higher quality than Java. I would
digress heavily on that. You have leniency in python not being strong
typed. Lack of generics and stuff could only mean that could be worse.
Relying on internals to handle data types for you.

I found so many bugs in java-config when porting to C/Jem. Most were
hidden due to how Python operates.... I never bothered filing bugs. I
have mention of most all in my IRC logs. It was pretty considerable.

> > Anything in Gentoo that goes against the status quo gets heavy
> > resistance and thus Gentoo does not change. But continues on with
> > the status quo....
> >   
> 
> You are talking *nonsense*. The python-r1 was *against* status quo. We
> changed it. Now you want the old status quo back.

Regardless of new eclass, the TARGETS remain. Things did not change
from a user perspective. Recently packaging some ebuilds, the
COMPAT/VERSION does not seem to have changed. Despite what ever
changes to the eclass.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]