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 1SYhXH-0006Ew-4M for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 17:45:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A4E3E0712; Sun, 27 May 2012 17:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E21CFE0712 for ; Sun, 27 May 2012 17:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (87-205-57-114.adsl.inetia.pl [87.205.57.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 943751B4011; Sun, 27 May 2012 17:45:42 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 19:46:40 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-python@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-python] Do we need another 'new' python eclass besides python-distutils-ng? Message-ID: <20120527194640.15bf617a@pomiocik.lan> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Discussions centering around the Python ecosystem in Gentoo Linux X-BeenThere: gentoo-python@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-python@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/tljq4QLaA6KY7=.4wlE_uoA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: d538d14d-9760-45c0-99fd-0aa620f715b4 X-Archives-Hash: de578a9e04b95741ff8e3963511a37f0 --Sig_/tljq4QLaA6KY7=.4wlE_uoA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, So noone feels omitted, the first question with 'new' Python eclasses - does 'just' python-distutils-ng suit us, or do we need to split out a more basic eclass of some sort? My opinion here: python-distutils-ng itself could be fine, because: 1) packages which don't support multiple Python ABIs probably don't need anything like our USEflags or other stuff that -ng provides -- they're as good with the old python.eclass; 2) packages which use distutils are fine with p-d-ng; 3) packages which are built for multiple Python ABIs yet do not use distutils need to declare python_compile() and stuff anyway. And if we do, then p-d-ng is basically python-ng. What're your thoughts? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/tljq4QLaA6KY7=.4wlE_uoA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk/CaIQACgkQfXuS5UK5QB2mvgQAmQZp5D8Ec8G/wcE130wpx7Y1 5hFFDBi+jjQcLCkzvv4uM4CU/gUvARJX2NlBqZSMfllWNrkzlybl6K2HvKVav3o2 qscz89hhZ/XuiuJuaUnwCtF8oUkgODCKV7MlAYLmpk0DFEo8ZPqW2Qq02WrHWAsw qqNoIjblB+o7pE2C83M= =waNe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/tljq4QLaA6KY7=.4wlE_uoA--