From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 684671381F3 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:03:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C8B6E0909; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f47.google.com (mail-bk0-f47.google.com [209.85.214.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62A2BE0905 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f47.google.com with SMTP id ik5so217279bkc.34 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:03:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=APDku3b1MCelxwWg6dp+iOYOixn0MRJPtXgQ4VUEk4g=; b=K/HN74JD/FR1YO1jxgPJzwWoKkoJPuV9t7zCOnumFYdZf5Ht9McmKuhi5hHdyg6dH1 MLahIP6dyzbFjwfd+Kf1Asx48UtRxbQdox9Nqdwh5aCxSCnNWW6Nnbf/il9Sgu+w3Cc9 6AIA7GscGoENfboitqB//GGXPQK+93zMifCwCXVYTYtQ5mR8hfZpaRD35DqlHSg9S25x d2LSrlTSV9BJ74mYcoyUEwU4oG2c4C71WiIhbgZdC1UdShPXGWDCUb7rBVnRaCVqhtnN pEkyg51xEtctJRUhMEqc6aZ7gMydPDD9FRCwukISasiemtCsu1MJ9w7svptQNZq7XY/S 4Mxw== X-Received: by 10.205.68.195 with SMTP id xz3mr731927bkb.41.1365599022880; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:03:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.4.18] ([5.157.117.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id uo3sm5729011bkb.11.2013.04.10.06.03.41 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <516562F4.6020400@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:02:44 +0200 From: "vivo75@gmail.com" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130326 Thunderbird/17.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org CC: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= , dirtyepic@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-04-09 References: <20817.55135.354752.397336@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20130408232028.56cdad67@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> <20130409075747.24cc17d3@pomiocik.lan> <201304091524.11412.vapier@gentoo.org> <20130409222416.023d9b52@pomiocik.lan> <20130409180728.3ceb2e53@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> <20130410054151.17132120@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <20130410054151.17132120@pomiocik.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: d50c69a4-2ead-48ac-9a96-d0c05b8b8cb4 X-Archives-Hash: ef911a768b8ab085363c5938749e2ff3 On 04/10/13 05:41, Michał Górny wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 18:07:28 -0600 > Ryan Hill wrote: > >> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 22:24:16 +0200 >> Michał Górny wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 15:24:10 -0400 >>> Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday 09 April 2013 01:57:47 Michał Górny wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 23:20:28 -0600 Ryan Hill wrote: >>>>>> If someone else wants to try and improve the situation, please feel >>>>>> free. >>>>> Just to be sure -- would you be ok if we tried to inline some >>>>> of the eclass code into the ebuilds (future versions/revbumps)? >>>> not really. you can still build gcc-2.95 and newer with the current code, >>>> but the amount of "tc_version_is_at_least" is fairly low. from time to >>>> time, people also create their own gcc ebuild forks which use this eclass >>>> either because it's a completely different code base, orit has some serious >>>> patches that we aren't interested in carrying, or people want to >>>> experiment. current examples: kgcc64 msp430 gcc-apple. we've had other >>>> embedded works in the past, as well as hardened ones. >>> Then please don't create a fake feeling like you're going to accept >>> help to improve the situation. >> These are things the eclass has to support and the restraints we have to work >> under. Don't throw a snit if you don't like the problem space. > My point is that if you'll put everything into the eclass you're never > going to improve it. It will be just going from one mess into another, > and the ebuilds should never go stable if they don't even have their > own phase functions. > Actually putting everithing in an eclass could make maintenaince easyer and faster while providing history of changes. My example being mysql (and forks) which use mysql*.eclass. Stability for the mysql packages has been good, while maintaining _multiple_ versions of them actually useable. Disclaimer: The actual mantainers opinion may be even the opposite of this one, and mine may very well be biased, since I'm the one who moved the ebuild in the eclasses few years ago.