From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: bkohler@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] did python-r1 improve user experience?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 21:30:57 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ0EP42cUvjZqXtzhRJpeR410QGKJ=8kV+em5=NGwLRhty3JUA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5267CB83.3000306@gentoo.org>
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:13 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Since I maintain blender I have come across quite a few frustrated
> users already: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=488976#c7
>
> I am not sure myself. On one hand we don't need python-updater anymore
> and have very tight dependencies that ensure that all needed modules
> are always available for the desired implementation.
>
> On the other hand it seems to give a lot of users trouble with
> blockers, general configuration and mass-updates on things like
> removing python:2.5.
>
> What are your opinions? Did it improve user experience? What could be
> improved?
As one of the lead devs on the python team, here are my thoughts.
I think we have made things more "correct". As a developer, it is much
easier for me to tell when a package has incomplete or simply broken
python dependencies.
On the user side, I think we have traded occasional/random build
failures due to mismatched python versions for some barely
comprehensible portage dependency conflict messages. This is certainly
not ideal, but I think it is always better to have portage fail during
dependency resolution than at build time.
The (non-)relationship between eselect python and PYTHON_TARGETS is
something that would be nice to resolve, but I don't know how to do
it. PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET will probably cause problems if/when packages
start supporting python3 only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-27 1:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-23 13:13 [gentoo-user] did python-r1 improve user experience? hasufell
2013-10-27 1:30 ` Mike Gilbert [this message]
2013-10-27 2:18 ` Walter Dnes
2013-10-27 2:22 ` Bruce Hill
2013-10-27 2:48 ` Mike Gilbert
2013-10-27 3:41 ` William Kenworthy
2013-10-27 19:53 ` Mike Gilbert
2013-11-01 2:11 ` gottlieb
2013-11-01 13:41 ` gottlieb
2013-11-01 14:01 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-11-01 15:43 ` gottlieb
2013-11-01 20:17 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-11-01 21:56 ` gottlieb
2013-11-02 1:22 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-11-01 20:30 ` Bruce Hill
2013-10-27 12:03 ` hasufell
2013-10-27 19:43 ` Mike Gilbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJ0EP42cUvjZqXtzhRJpeR410QGKJ=8kV+em5=NGwLRhty3JUA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=floppym@gentoo.org \
--cc=bkohler@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox