On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Michael Palimaka <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/24/2018 12:15 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> On 01/23/2018 07:40 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote: >>>> >>>> Did you come up with a solution how to handle eclass-generated dependency >>>> changes then? >>> >>> No. >>> >>> Bug #641346 was filed for clarification about this, but it just got >>> closed without answering the question or consulting anyone. >>> >>> Now, every time we want to make a minor change we need to revbump half >>> the tree due to a change that has been forced mostly by people not >>> actually involved in any actual ebuild maintenance. >> >> You could always set "--dynamic-deps y" on your machine, and ignore the >> breakage caused to end users (i.e. the situation last week). > > You mean the breakage caused by changing default options without any > consultation or notification? >
It would already be broken on any PMS-compliant package manager I imagine. The goal is to make the repo and PMS align so that we're not depending on non-PMS behavior. Either our ebuild policies ought to change, or PMS ought to change. It is dumb to publish a specification and then deliberately do things that break software that follows that specification. -- Rich
