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 A5D6C1381F3 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:58:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E7B96E05FA; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:58:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09BA6E05FA for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:58:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f46.google.com (mail-qa0-f46.google.com [209.85.216.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: djc) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 22FCE33D73B for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id c11so4468425qad.19 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 01:58:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.178.77 with SMTP id bl13mr2618102qcb.130.1353319093087; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 01:58:13 -0800 (PST) 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 Received: by 10.49.97.195 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 01:57:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20121115224425.5762484c@pomiocik.lan> References: <20121115224425.5762484c@pomiocik.lan> From: Dirkjan Ochtman Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:57:52 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: [gentoo-python] Re: Package supporting single implementation only -- auxiliary variable solution To: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Cc: gentoo-python , Gentoo Python Project Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d75f3b69-fbdf-44cf-b57e-e46b7cedf9e4 X-Archives-Hash: b508ca0888dcb9daa4121e073152b34b On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > Of course, a MIP would not be allowed to depend on a SIP. How big of a problem would this be? > To sum it up quickly, the aux variable solution: > > Advantages: > - painless for most of our users, > - explicit, transparent, > - simple and matching SIP->SIP and SIP->MIP deps. > > Disadvantages: > - a bit redundant, Given the requirement for enabling multiple implementation in PYTHON_TARGETS, which I feel strongly about, there has to be a choice which one of the implementations will be target for SINGLE_TARGET packages. Adding a variable for that, therefore, doesn't seem redundant. > - does not solve the issue for py3-only SIP packages, I guess this might become a problem in the future. Once we have both py2-only SIP packages and py3-only SIP packages, we have a bit of a problem. Maybe we should think more about that. > - may require explicit action when changing PYTHON_TARGETS. Yeah, I don't see a problem with this. In particular, it seems unlikely that many people will setup their system to exclude the default SINGLE_TARGET impl (2.7) from their TARGETS. Cheers, Dirkjan