Dnia 2014-10-30, o godz. 16:26:51 Mike Gilbert <[email protected]> napisał(a):
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dnia 2014-10-30, o godz. 15:21:17 > > Ian Stakenvicius <[email protected]> napisał(a): > > > >> After discussion and review by mgorny, and significantly more testing, > >> here's an updated version of the previous patch. > >> > >> To reiterate, this patch changes python-single-r1 so that if there is > >> only one supported Python implementation that can satisfy the ebuild, > >> then PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET is ignored, and the ebuild is bound by the > >> value(s) set in PYTHON_TARGETS instead. > > > > It is not ignored but not declared, which is good. Ignoring is bad :). > > > > So I was pretty skeptic about this at first but after thinking it all > > over a few times, I think it will work just fine. While it benefits > > only the 'bad' kind of packages and adds some complexity, I believe > > this is a worthwhile change. > > I guess I'm still a little skeptical. > > What is the advantage to making such a change to python-single-r1 as > opposed to just using python-r1 with a single implementation in > PYTHON_COMPAT? 1. It's easier to use than python-r1, 2. It doesn't pretend you support multiple implementations. Someone won't get a big zonk attempting to enable python3 support one day. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
