-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 09/14/2012 05:27 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:18:16 -0400
> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 09/14/2012 04:56 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:51:54 -0400
>>> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I have a personal vendetta on this subject. Several eclasses set a
>>>> completely worthless description (and even more set a mostly
>>>> worthless DESCRIPTION) which ends up contaminating the DESCRIPTION
>>>> for an ebuild when inherit is done after DESCRIPTION is set.
>>>
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/78813/
>>>
>>>> I realize that most of you will find this a little pedantic,
>>>> however, I find that needing to move my DESCRIPTION to below the
>>>> inherit often severely affects the readability of the ebuild, and
>>>> all to avoid a completely (or nearly) worthless DESCRIPTION from
>>>> contaminating my environment.
>>>
>>> You want your inherit line to be as near as the top as possible. The
>>> only things you should have before the inherit line are EAPI and any
>>> variables used by eclasses to determine behaviour.
>>>
>>>
>> I have a nasty habit of writing ebuilds to be both live and versioned
>> which requires me to test ${PV} then set things like inherit VCS,
>> SRC-URI, and KEYWORDS below. The large if block looks better in my
>> opinion below the settings which are the same for all versions, rather
>> than in the middle.
>>
>> Yes, it's a readability issue, but the point is, this shouldn't be an
>> issue at all.
>
> Use unifdef. Look at my overlay, and my ebuilds in the tree.
>
So just so we are clear, everyone but me thinks that DESCRIPTION="Based
on the ${ECLASS} eclass" is a completely useful and critically required
piece of code?
That is really what this boils done to, it isn't. Seriously, I've read
some worthless code in my day and written a lot more of it, but this is
something that is completely unneeded and causes extra work maintaining
the tree. We could extend repoman to detect when an eclass description
is polluting an ebuild, OR we could remove the completely useless code.
If give the choice between "Clean the code and it works right" or "Hack
around the solution and write extra code to detect when you need to hack
around the solution" you can clearly imagine where I sit.
If anyone wants to explain to me why that DESCRIPTION line is so
critical that it must exist yet not important enough to put something
worthwhile in I'm all ears. Until that point I'll probably keep bringing
this up.
Thanks,
Zero
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/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=eUD1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
