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 1SYGdQ-0007pL-LM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CBA9E05CF; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4413EE05CF for ; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA451B4006; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.531 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 E1TRPf552q-m; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 381061B4007; Sat, 26 May 2012 13:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0C920AFF; Sat, 26 May 2012 09:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.161]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 26 May 2012 09:02:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:subject:references:date:to :cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:from:message-id :in-reply-to; s=smtpout; bh=gMVa/+s1Ra02HJn2Hwn15tRDhXI=; b=R23X ZV1y98l7Xfvbv31HuN7u2nHMW/3VUIZ4SVdN3JkZ0Mt1Nb4rPk/jpqFc+QgSQmAc oUzRnfVoiGj+FAGoIyjtulYT5azdAw+tZLymX5lNi2voeeKvpU1dPYha0mMLi/ht 6Xkj5c/9Rje0cbuTZro6v8GBGB/50OJLSzk+D1Q= X-Sasl-enc: OEQb7OFfMJ7uQh6C/RpE3T10+Bw+zZxodLlg0ShJogdK 1338037324 Received: from gentoobook.trollsnaetverk (unknown [46.32.64.68]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 907B4483608; Sat, 26 May 2012 09:02:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Subject: Re: [gentoo-python] python-distutils.eclass vs. python.eclass + distutils.eclass References: Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 17:01:26 +0400 To: gentoo-python Cc: "Dirkjan Ochtman" 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Nikolaj Sjujskij" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.64 (Linux) X-Archives-Salt: dc816756-f7ce-4731-b33a-667cc827c449 X-Archives-Hash: 5bb70af30652cd7d158a155219821a60 > So I think the second part of this (x.y to x.y+1 transitions, in the > Python world, are generally relatively smooth) invalidates your point > in the first part: if the transitions are generally smooth, then yes, > when Python 3.3 gets stabilized, I want all of my Python packages to > be available from the 3.3 interpreter. Let's take a "stable" user who updates (`emerge --update --deep --newuse @world`) his/her system regularly. Python 3.3 is released, added to Portage tree and eventually unmasked. PYTHON_TARGETS variable is changed to include 3.3. And suddenly `emerge --newuse @world` on stable system suggests rebuilding of every package using new eclass, because new (though disabled) USE-flags was added. And when Python 3.3 is keyworded stable, hence bringing new default PYTHON_TARGETS, user should now rebuild those packages once more, but now, at least, not uselessly. Just yesterday I had www-servers/uwsgi recompiled because of changed RUBY_TARGETS. And I even have no Ruby installed. > So, I'd prefer it if, instead of speaking up about general concerns > that the new eclass isn't ready or has serious problems, people please > file one bug each about each serious problem they have run into, > found, or are concerned about, CC the python team, and we'll try to > take a look. I had written about problems with new eclass a couple of weeks ago here. Not that anybody cares that now any user not caring about dev-lang/python explicitly would get Python 2.7 and all his modules compiled twice for no good reason (except "we can't think out more sensible default for new eclass"). Whether or not does he *really* need Python 2.x or stable and included-in-stage3 Python 3.2 suffices for him.