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 569DE138BF3 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:15:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A380E09F8; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:15:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B06BCE09F8 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:15:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA64033F1DA for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:15:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id w61so11072557wes.12 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:15:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1mA1EK75T+PUrpRlZ8eNPxt9PdM99EQugnGGhk9CquE=; b=NHnu0kjqIJEsBSxw0DMvU+Kgh8rXI1Mtdk/1HN0YUzczTZUGEmnfVB+AeDYYVeXrVZ H99cT6/zmCRD3f5PR0dMRyvjxSMhWyTYq2v/586rZ5dvDKtUkf4U/jVmg/1yNjKGJDJw fKN3dO9+O0oC63jnB3hjjuzy1js89oGEpCbO53jVNPZEeRaGLNaUNMd6JO5CMgPF6352 gfJxnWKu8gy7XxEzs3Nm04W+83mI3r1Ef5Y2VnNhWryzGxmc6oBww0MG2ogd/CaH64tp 9W7fcdq13ttFyGxDmAdfNknxlAvakYviloLrB1PKMnSpBnPoAoSgwz40CSZPcdFtqd07 z4Lg== 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 X-Received: by 10.180.211.50 with SMTP id mz18mr14579061wic.43.1392664541412; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:15:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.162.229 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:15:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140217201223.235ed9ea@pomiot.lan> References: <1392662644-19943-1-git-send-email-floppym@gentoo.org> <20140217201223.235ed9ea@pomiot.lan> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:15:41 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-python] [PATCH] python.eclass: Add 3.4 to _CPYTHON3_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS From: Mike Gilbert To: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Cc: gentoo-python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: b22983ca-d2f8-41b7-b319-324fa51e5239 X-Archives-Hash: 07ff3dceb55e660d98145d89e6971de9 On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > Dnia 2014-02-17, o godz. 13:44:04 > Mike Gilbert napisa=C5=82(a): > >> Index: python.eclass >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/eclass/python.eclass,v >> retrieving revision 1.169 >> diff -u -r1.169 python.eclass >> --- python.eclass 6 Feb 2014 05:34:07 -0000 1.169 >> +++ python.eclass 17 Feb 2014 18:40:31 -0000 >> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ >> # focus on converting packages to use the new eclasses. >> >> _CPYTHON2_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7) >> -_CPYTHON3_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(3.1 3.2 3.3) >> +_CPYTHON3_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4) >> _JYTHON_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(2.5-jython 2.7-jython) >> _PYPY_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(2.7-pypy-1.7 2.7-pypy-1.8 2.7-pypy-1.9= 2.7-pypy-2.0) >> _PYTHON_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS=3D(${_CPYTHON2_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS[= @]} ${_CPYTHON3_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS[@]} ${_JYTHON_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_AB= IS[@]} ${_PYPY_GLOBALLY_SUPPORTED_ABIS[@]}) > > To be honest, I'm against adding new implementations to the old eclass. > I'm all for letting it rot and not adding extra work on maintaining > ebuilds using it. Since it is opt-out, adding the new implementation > would mean we need to add restrictions to ebuilds. > > Instead, I'd just say that we require the new eclass for py3.4. > That's fine by me, as long as it doesn't break anything. I can't think of any such breakage off the top of my head.