On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:35:48 +1200 Kent Fredric <[email protected]> wrote: > > Meanwhile, you cannot build two parts of a given python dependency > chain with different pythons, nor different perls.
True but this is not changing how things work, just reversing. > Right, but this is impossible with Ruby, Python, and Perl. It is done right now. The problem your describing exist now and is addressed. This would address it the same way but reversed. > Perl *could* have targets, and some people think could do with it, > but it and java are very much in different boats. Easier to deal with as a user. Less work as a developer. > Perl is in the same boat as Python and Ruby where in "new version of > thing" means "everything must be compiled with the new target" Installation wise, but with a new JDK, you can still have compilation failures with existing packages. That it gets installed in the same place is moot regarding differences with Java and other languages. > I honestly think you're looking at the wrong problem domain to fix > this problem, in ways that will introduce yet more regressions and > broken trees. Problem is simple, Targets are a PITA to deal with, ever changing. They lead to issues when you select incompatible ones or options. Best case wild card and let all install. But otherwise its a chore to deal with. > We only have 2 types of option at present from the users perspective, > "on" options, and "off" options. That sounds terrible. Lots of distros with things already turned on/off. Gentoo should never be one. USE flags can be a PITA, but they are a necessary evil. Its the ever changing TARGETS that are annoying, and cumbersome to users. -- William L. Thomson Jr.
pgpoXNMHlFEGf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
