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 ) id 1Nsmw9-00017q-Qq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:53:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B06CE094A; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9917E07A6 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:52:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751081B407E for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:52:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.557 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.557 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yCQqvmXljAHz for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:52:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92E81B4017 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:52:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NsmvI-0001K2-8R for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:52:16 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:52:16 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:52:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:51:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4BA27CE2.7080005@gentoo.org> <20100318192424.GH13380@gentoo.org> <20100318215331.59ad6253@notorcomp.notorgroup.local> <20100319081207.22282ba9@snowmobile> <4BA33BC4.10502@gmail.com> <20100319085751.1c7f5dca@snowmobile> <4BA34293.1040302@gmail.com> <20100319093033.16437529@snowmobile> <4BA34E5C.7040800@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 8fdb8c90-8979-4f9f-b0a8-dc68eb65194b X-Archives-Hash: a26b21749eda89f4294cbd0221a5280a Dale posted on Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:13:48 -0500 as excerpted: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:23:31 -0500 >> Dale wrote: >> =20 >>>> It's being installed because it's a dependency of something you use. >>>> >>>> Replace Python with any other library and we wouldn't be having this >>>> discussion. >>>> =20 >>> OK. Right now, as you type this, what package depends on python-3 an= d >>> won't work with python-2? Anything at all? If it is nothing, then >>> why install it? >>> =20 >> And that's where you're making the mistake: you're treating Python as >> being different from every other package. >> >> In every other case, you want things to be using the newest version of >> a slotted package where possible. Why aren't you complaining that you >> were forced to install gcc 4.3 and 4.1 when 3.4 worked just fine? >> >> > Because, when I installed gcc 4.3, I could then unmerge the old gcc. > That's why I didn't complain about that. With python, we still have to > have the current version plus the new version which is not being used a= t > all. I had to pick somewhere to reply, and this seemed as good a place as any,= =20 as it does give me a jumping off point... It seems to me Ciaran is correct in one point, at least: python-3.x /is/=20 different than most such major updates (but then again, each such major=20 update tends to have its unique points). That's why this huge discussion= . It also seems to me that, due to the resolver and dependency specifier=20 technology on the one side, the practicalities of running one's system=20 with least complication (thus, most people /not/ wanting the normal updat= e=20 as soon as available/stable, in this /special/ case) on another, politica= l=20 correctness (the problem with just masking it in base and being done with= =20 it) on a third, and the number of packages to update to specific=20 dependencies much like portage's, should that be chosen, on the fourth,=20 we're pretty much surrounded with unpleasant alternatives that /are/ goin= g=20 to be something of an issue for /some/, no matter which is chosen. Again, thus the huge discussion. So what can be done besides continuing to spin wheels as we are? What's=20 the least painful, yet still practical, alternative, all factors=20 considered? Here's one that I'll admit isn't perfect, but none are. Yet this one=20 seems the best way forward to me, given the alternatives. First, let's step back a moment and remember a defining characteristic of= =20 Gentoo, that we give the users both freedom and responsibility for their=20 own systems, and have never made excuses for that fact. Second, let's remember that we /do/ have the news feature now, so at leas= t=20 there's a way to communicate a warning about such things. After that,=20 it's generally up to the user, as, ultimately, it seems likely to be=20 here. But we /can/ warn them using a news item, first, and given that,=20 we /should/. So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a news=20 item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked, and sugges= t=20 that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it themselves, with a=20 link to documentation with specific instructions and a bit more detail on= =20 why they might wish to mask it and under what circumstances they might no= t. I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news item. Yes, that's not going to get everyone before it happens, but the news ite= m=20 will be there after that for those what want to read it, and if people=20 aren't doing that --ask or --pretend before they go doing their updates,=20 especially if they're going a month or more between updates, well... =20 Worst-case they get a py3k sitting there basically unused, and a few extr= a=20 builds for some period, until such time as py3k is considered stable and=20 popular enough to be the system default. This to me seems the best of painful choices. Down side, it's forcing=20 every user to fiddle with their masks or decide not to. Three up sides: (1) At least with the news item they get some warning and can put the mas= k=20 in place ahead of time. (2) We're simply relying on one of the best=20 features of Gentoo, the one giving the user both the freedom and=20 responsibility to manage his own system. (3) It gives us a way to=20 actually move forward, /now/, using our current tools, without continuing= =20 the debate /forever/. Can anyone shoot holes in this any worse than the other proposals? Let's= =20 give our users the warning they need, and treat them like the adults=20 Gentoo has always claimed to respect them as. What they do with it after= =20 that is up to them. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman