On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 15:04 +0300, Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov wrote: > В письме от пятница, 15 ноября 2019 г. 13:47:12 MSK пользователь Mart > Raudsepp > написал: > > Ühel kenal päeval, R, 15.11.2019 kell 13:20, kirjutas Alexey 'Alexxy' > > > > Shvetsov: > > > В письме от пятница, 15 ноября 2019 г. 11:45:32 MSK пользователь > > > Michał Górny > > > > > > написал: > > > > On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 11:41 +0300, Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov wrote: > > > > > I think problem is more global: > > > > > * many python3_6 packages dont have python3_7 keywords, because > > > > > its > > > > > maintainers dont bother about it. So if you want to switch to > > > > > python3_7 > > > > > you > > > > > still need manualy add python3_7 use for many packages (that > > > > > actualy work > > > > > without problems > > > > > * we need policy for python packages that force enablement of new > > > > > python > > > > > version on existing packages. > > > > > > > > Policy makes little sense if there's no way to enforce it. > > > > > > > > If you tested some package on py3.7 and depgraph, just add it > > > > there. > > > > > > Some people dont like it =D And some arches (doesnt matter if i have > > > such hw > > > and tested on it) > > > > People mostly don't like it when you throw unrelated changes on top of > > that, under the guise of just python target addition, especially when > > they are also broken changes and involve a revbump without maintainers > > involvement (just PYTHON_TARGETS addition doesn't). Or if it actually > > doesn't work with the added python targets. > > As i remember some decades ago policy was: revbump needed if you change > chnages stuff installed on filesystem. So in case of py addition it is. So > what > changed? > > Are there some new written rules that says in what case you need revbump and > in what it needed?
https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/index.html -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
