On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Brian Dolbec <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 10:38 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
>> This allows catalyst to work regardless of whether a user prefers that
>> usr/bin/python be python 2.x or 3.x.
>> ---
>>  catalyst | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/catalyst b/catalyst
>> index 4550d05..11560fb 100755
>> --- a/catalyst
>> +++ b/catalyst
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -#!/usr/bin/python -OO
>> +#!/usr/bin/python2 -OO
>>
>>  # Maintained in full by:
>>  # Catalyst Team <[email protected]>
>
>
> I'll reply to all 4 patches from this one.
>
> This is not needed due to the way python apps are wrapped during
> install.  bin/catalyst is renamed to bin/catalyst-python2.x and a
> python-exec script replaces the original bin/catalyst.

What do we gain by doing this in the ebuild's src_install() over doing
it in? Because...

> This is only
> good for running the code directly from the git checkout.

actually seems useful. We've had clearly broken commits go upstream,
and if the author had been able to test from a git checkout we
probably could have avoided that.

> Also, we plan
> to make the code python-3 capable as soon as a few more main code
> changes are done.

This isn't a reason to not specify the correct version of python.

> As for the other patches, that work is already done in my rewrite and
> will be taking over the master branch soon.  It is the 3.0 branch which
> has been rebased to the rewrite-on-master branch.  There are a couple
> rebase errors to fix on it still.
>
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/catalyst.git

Sounds like it shouldn't be any trouble to rebase on top of Dylan's
patches, which are (pending the v2 of patch 2) read to be applied to
master.

What I mean is that I don't want to turn down contributions from new
developers because there's a big backlog of work that hasn't gone
upstream.

Reply via email to