William Hubbs:
All,
I spoke with mgorny on IRC and found out what his concerns are about our
current eclasses.
First, he thinks we should get rid of base.eclass.
I know there is work going on to get rid of it, but I haven't really
looked into the status much yet. I do agree though, we
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:12 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think the first thing to do and which already happened with e.g.
qmake-utils.eclass is to make a very strong distinction between utility
eclasses and those that export phase functions.
Discussion on IRC the other day was
All,
I spoke with mgorny on IRC and found out what his concerns are about our
current eclasses.
First, he thinks we should get rid of base.eclass.
I know there is work going on to get rid of it, but I haven't really
looked into the status much yet. I do agree though, we shouldn't have a
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The other concern he mentioned was indirectly inherited eclasses being
able to override phase functions.
So, while I'm not sure whether getting rid of the ability to inherit
phase functions is practical/good/etc, I do
