[gentoo-dev] Last rite: media-libs/mlt++ (removal due 19 Oct 2009)

2009-09-19 Thread Alexis Ballier

# Masked for removal
# Merged in media-libs/mlt
# Removal due 19 Oct 2009
media-libs/mlt++


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of november.
There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 18:48, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:
 Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of november.
 There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
 temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
 Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
 the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?

I think a news item is probably a good idea, if only because it gives
us something to point at.

Cheers,

Dirkjan



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Alex Legler
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:48:27 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:

 Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
 november. There was a suggestion to create a news item which would
 inform users that temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as
 their main interpreter. 

What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.

Alex


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
 What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
 interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.

Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?

Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
be fine.

Cheers,

Dirkjan



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Dale
Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
   
 What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
 interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
 

 Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
 entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?

 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.

 Cheers,

 Dirkjan


   

Isn't ~arch supposed to be for testing?  Isn't that the point of having
~arch?

Dale

:-)  :-) 



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Alex Legler
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:09:38 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org
wrote:

 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
  What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as
  main interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely
  used.
 
 Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
 entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?
 

Don't you think that ~arch makes it easily available enough for people
who *want* to port stuff? 
If I run stable Gentoo, I'm interested in a /stable/ system(tm) and not
the latest Python version that people are still fiddling with.
Especially since the Gentoo core system extensively uses Python. By the
way, does Portage work with Python 3 yet?

 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.
 

Yeah, right, let's install it on all those stable machines, but then
not use it.

Way to go!
Alex


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 12:21 -0500, Dale wrote:
 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
  On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:

  What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
  interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
  
 
  Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
  entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?
 
  Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
  Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
  be fine.

 Isn't ~arch supposed to be for testing?  Isn't that the point of having
 ~arch?

~arch is for testing ebuilds, not the upstream package

-- 
Olivier Crête
tes...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Nikos Chantziaras

On 09/19/2009 08:21 PM, Dale wrote:

Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Leglera...@gentoo.org  wrote:


What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.



Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?

Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
be fine.

Cheers,

Dirkjan





Isn't ~arch supposed to be for testing?  Isn't that the point of having
~arch?


For testing, yes.  But what about people who want to use it?  Not for 
portage, not as main interpreter, but simply use it.  Python is a 
programming language and has many uses, it's not only there to make 
portage happy.  There are people who actually use it, and those people 
would like it stabilized.  Just because portage isn't ported to 3.x yet 
shouldn't mean it can't go stable if there are no blockers about 3.x itself.





Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread AllenJB
Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
 What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
 interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
 
 Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
 entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?
 
 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Dirkjan
 

Yes, there is a very good reason: The sanity of the users and those who
support them.

As a user who has spent a lot of time on IRC and the forums supporting
other users, I think I can safely say that stabilizing a version of
python which is not supported by portage will end up in a nightmare
scenario. At the very least portage, python-updater and eselect, if not
the majority of the commonly used tools (whichever of gentoolkit,
portage-utils, eix, etc use python), should support python 3.1 before it
goes stable.

Everything would be fine if all the users read news items, forums,
mailing lists and web pages - but they don't. It will get missed by many
many users - too many for something that breaks portage, in my opinion.

I would suggest the developers keep python 3.1 out of stable until it is
supported by portage, puthon-updater and eselect at minimum (ie. you can
easily revert to 2.6).


While writing this an alternative solution has occurred to me: Make sure
portage dependencies are correct so that python doesn't get dep-cleaned
(a brief check of the portage 2.1.6.7 ebuild makes it look like this
currently isn't the case - surely this should've been done as soon as it
was known portage didn't support python 3!) and perhaps add a block to
eselect so that python-3.1 can't be selected as the system python
interpreter until portage supports it.

AllenJB



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! 

Aside from the remarks made by others (and speaking as someone
who maintains Python software), there is one reason for me to not
switch Python 3 to stable yet: lack of compatibility. Software
that runs with 3.x will not run with any 2.x version as of today
(and I doubt there will ever be a 2.x version of Python that can
run 3.x code).

As such, upstream devs will have to maintain two branches of
software for a rather long time. Thing is, some projects just
don't have the manpower to maintain two branches, so they will
stay with 2.x versions for now. Yes, it's a catch-22, but I doubt
that a sufficiently large portion of projects will have a
3.x-compatible branch/version this year (sufficient meaning
over 95%).

On the other hand, we can patch everything that doesn't run with
3.x (i.e. fixing the shebang lines and maybe assorted paths).
The Python team is more suited to evaluate the feasibility of
that.

Regards,
Tobias

PS: As an illustration: just look at how long it took to get a
2.6-compatible version of mailman into the tree...




Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread AllenJB
Alex Legler wrote:
 On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:09:38 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org
 wrote:
 
 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.

 
 Yeah, right, let's install it on all those stable machines, but then
 not use it.
 
 Way to go!
 Alex

Surely this isn't an issue: If the dependencies on packages are correct,
surely this shouldn't happen?

If the dependencies aren't correct, maybe checking and correcting them
for every package that needs python should be a requirement for
stabilization.

AllenJB



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:
 Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of november.
 There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
 temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
 Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
 the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?


Have any other distribution moved to purely using python-3.1? The
reason is pretty simple: Not everything has been ported to use 3.1
yet. Hell, I personally have 3.1 under a local p.mask so I don't have
to bother with breakage due to it. (existing packages as well as
scripts/projects I have).

I do believe it will be very counter-productive to move it to stable
at this point.


-- 
~Nirbheek Chauhan

GNOME+Mozilla Team, Gentoo



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2009-09-19 20:22:49 Tobias Klausmann napisał(a):
 Hi! 
 
 Aside from the remarks made by others (and speaking as someone
 who maintains Python software), there is one reason for me to not
 switch Python 3 to stable yet: lack of compatibility. Software
 that runs with 3.x will not run with any 2.x version as of today

It's possible (and not too hard) to write code which works with
Python 3 and 2.6. It might be also possible to support older
versions, but it would require many ugly exec() calls etc.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2009-09-19 20:45:45 Nirbheek Chauhan napisał(a):
 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:
  Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of 
  november.
  There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
  temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
  Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
  the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?
 
 
 Have any other distribution moved to purely using python-3.1?

We won't move to purely using Python 3.1. Both Python 2 and 3 will be used.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2009-09-19 20:20:10 AllenJB napisał(a):
 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
  On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
  What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
  interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
  
  Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
  entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?
  
  Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
  Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
  be fine.
  
  Cheers,
  
  Dirkjan
  
 
 Yes, there is a very good reason: The sanity of the users and those who
 support them.
 
 As a user who has spent a lot of time on IRC and the forums supporting
 other users, I think I can safely say that stabilizing a version of
 python which is not supported by portage will end up in a nightmare
 scenario. At the very least portage, python-updater and eselect, if not
 the majority of the commonly used tools (whichever of gentoolkit,
 portage-utils, eix, etc use python), should support python 3.1 before it
 goes stable.

python-updater and eselect are written in bash. portage-utils are written
in C. eix is written in C++.

 perhaps add a block to eselect so that python-3.1 can't be selected as
 the system python interpreter until portage supports it.

Users might want to sometimes temporarily switch to Python 3 to test some
Portage-unrelated code.
Anyway Portage will support Python 3 soon.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Mark Loeser
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfre...@gentoo.org said:
 Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of november.
 There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
 temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
 Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
 the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?

Please don't do this.  The stable system is meant to Just Work.  We
don't need people switching between python versions and making half of
their system unusuable.  There is absolutely no benefit to moving it to
stable.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web   -   http://www.halcy0n.com


pgpBOqjpyzWlZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:
 Have any other distribution moved to purely using python-3.1?

 We won't move to purely using Python 3.1. Both Python 2 and 3 will be used.


Let me modify me question: Has any other distribution moved to using
python-3 by default? Because that is what will happen when you
stabilize python-3.1. You will move to it by default. Everyone who
installs Gentoo will get python-3.1. Everyone who has 2.6 will get 3.1
-- unless they take action to prevent that. That is the _definition_
of default.

For the normal user, no amount of documentation. I repeated BLOODY
*NO* amount of documentation will change the fact that the default is
broken system for a stable install.

Whoever suggested that python-3.1 should go stable immediately needs
his head examined.


Nirbheek,
Extremely Pissed Off At This Idiocy.

-- 
~Nirbheek Chauhan

GNOME+Mozilla Team, Gentoo



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Petteri Räty
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
 2009-09-19 20:20:10 AllenJB napisał(a):
 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
 What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
 interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
 Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
 entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?

 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.

 Cheers,

 Dirkjan

 Yes, there is a very good reason: The sanity of the users and those who
 support them.

 As a user who has spent a lot of time on IRC and the forums supporting
 other users, I think I can safely say that stabilizing a version of
 python which is not supported by portage will end up in a nightmare
 scenario. At the very least portage, python-updater and eselect, if not
 the majority of the commonly used tools (whichever of gentoolkit,
 portage-utils, eix, etc use python), should support python 3.1 before it
 goes stable.
 
 python-updater and eselect are written in bash. portage-utils are written
 in C. eix is written in C++.
 
 perhaps add a block to eselect so that python-3.1 can't be selected as
 the system python interpreter until portage supports it.
 
 Users might want to sometimes temporarily switch to Python 3 to test some
 Portage-unrelated code.
 Anyway Portage will support Python 3 soon.
 

The users who test code usually have the skills to unmask the things
they need. Stabling 3.x should bring benefit to people who don't write
anything in python because it will be upgraded for all users. If we
don't make 3.x part of system then we can talk about stabilizing it.

Regards,
Petteri



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Robert Bridge
Speaking as a user, I seem to recall having multiple versions of python
installed in the past, and never really knowing or caring which version was
being used so long as stuff worked. If you want to install python-3.14159 in
the stable tree, than go right ahead, so long as anything that doesn't work
with python-3 can still access python-2 and does so without me knowing, it
doesn't matter.

So the question isn't SHOULD python-3 be stabilised, it's what will break if
it is surely?


[gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:35:08 -0400
Mark Loeser halc...@gentoo.org wrote:

 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfre...@gentoo.org said:
  Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of 
  november.
  There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
  temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main interpreter.
  Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm not sure if
  the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?
 
 Please don't do this.  The stable system is meant to Just Work.  We
 don't need people switching between python versions and making half of
 their system unusuable.  There is absolutely no benefit to moving it to
 stable.

I have to agree.  It gains us nothing and creates an opportunity for
disaster.  Anyone wanting python-3.1 has the ability to unmask it.


-- 
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark.
gcc-porting,
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Alistair Bush
 Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
  november. There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform
  users that temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main
  interpreter. Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm
  not sure if the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?
 

Stablise.

And to pacify all the cry babies out there could we update portage tools to 
call /usr/bin/python2.6 directly? (yes I realise this will break, but at least 
it is a suggestion)   Or how about we (remove python3.1 from the menu)/(stick 
a big fat warning message)/(do something else) on eselect-python.  Or create a 
system-python link that all gentoo core apps use instead of /usr/bin/python 
(longer term solution?).  [rant]Hell maybe we could even start using those 
slot dep thingy me bobbies to depend only a slot. So ppl don't have python3.1 
unless something depends on it.  Does portage have support for slots in world?
[/rant]

Solutions ppl.  Thats is what we need.  Not oh poor woe is me.

Alistair.



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Dale
Olivier Crête wrote:
 On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 12:21 -0500, Dale wrote:
   
 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
 
 On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 19:06, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org wrote:
   
   
 What is the point of stabilizing it if users shouldn't use it as main
 interpreter? Just leave it in ~arch until it can be safely used.
 
 
 Making it easily available so that people can port stuff, so that the
 entire world may be able to use it as their main interpreter sooner?

 Seriously, it's out there, there's no reason to keep it from stable.
 Just prevent people from making python invoke 3.x and everything will
 be fine.
   
 Isn't ~arch supposed to be for testing?  Isn't that the point of having
 ~arch?
 

 ~arch is for testing ebuilds, not the upstream package

   

So it would be OK to mark something stable even tho portage itself
doesn't work with it?  Sorry, this makes no sense to me.  I run stable
for the most part and having a package that portage depends on that is
not stable just sounds a little like putting the cart before the horse.

See some of the other replies as to why this is a not so good idea. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 



Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Dawid Węgliński
On Sunday 20 of September 2009 00:32:28 Dale wrote:
 
  ~arch is for testing ebuilds, not the upstream package

 So it would be OK to mark something stable even tho portage itself
 doesn't work with it?  Sorry, this makes no sense to me.  I run stable
 for the most part and having a package that portage depends on that is
 not stable just sounds a little like putting the cart before the horse.

 See some of the other replies as to why this is a not so good idea.

 Dale

 :-)  :-)

You mix it up. Portage works with python 3.1. If an user switches to python 
3.1 as the main interpreter, it's possible that his own scripts won't work. 
Marking it stable sometine in november give's some time to ebuilds 
maintainers to fix their python based apps just like it's done with gcc 
stabilization.

So marking python 3.1 stable and telling users port your own apps/scripts to 
current python sounds good to me.



[gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Mark Bateman
AllenJB gentoo-lists at allenjb.me.uk writes:

 
 As a user who has spent a lot of time on IRC and the forums supporting
 other users, I think I can safely say that stabilizing a version of
 python which is not supported by portage will end up in a nightmare
 scenario. At the very least portage, python-updater and eselect, if not
 the majority of the commonly used tools (whichever of gentoolkit,
 portage-utils, eix, etc use python), should support python 3.1 before it
 goes stable.

1) All those tools (eselect, python-wrapper, python-updater) are written in
other languages specifically to ensure a means to update python

2) There has existed for a very long time patches to portage to make it
compatible with python3.x


Stabilizing Python3.x isn't really an issue as long as some means to ensure
people do not emerge -c a python2.x version (eg adding it to the system profile)





Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Alex Alexander
*On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 23:21, Robert Bridge rob...@robbieab.com wrote:
 So the question isn't SHOULD python-3 be stabilised, it's what will break if
 it is surely?

There seems to be a misunderstanding on what will happen if/when
python 3 gets stabilized.

The short answer is... *drum roll*... nothing :)

I'm guessing that the idea of getting python 3 stable is to allow
people interested in using it to do so easily. We're talking about the
stabilization of python 3, NOT switching portage or your system to it.

Python 2.6 will continue to be the user's default python even after he
installs version 3. In fact, if you're using ~testing you should have
it already and your system is probably still working OK :)

Now.. if a user decides to switch his system *manually* to python 3
without thinking... he's asking for it :)

-- 
Alex || wired
Gentoo Dev
www.linuxized.com



[gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:55:00 +1200
Alistair Bush ali_b...@gentoo.org wrote:

  Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
   november. There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform
   users that temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main
   interpreter. Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so I'm
   not sure if the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?
  
 
 Stablise.
 
 And to pacify all the cry babies out there could we update portage tools to 
 call /usr/bin/python2.6 directly? (yes I realise this will break, but at 
 least 
 it is a suggestion)   Or how about we (remove python3.1 from the menu)/(stick 
 a big fat warning message)/(do something else) on eselect-python.  Or create 
 a 
 system-python link that all gentoo core apps use instead of /usr/bin/python 
 (longer term solution?).  [rant]Hell maybe we could even start using those 
 slot dep thingy me bobbies to depend only a slot. So ppl don't have python3.1 
 unless something depends on it.  Does portage have support for slots in world?
 [/rant]

Or we could, say, leave it ~arch.

Why do you need python-3 in stable?


-- 
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark.
gcc-porting,
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Francesco R
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote:

 On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:55:00 +1200
 Alistair Bush ali_b...@gentoo.org wrote:

   Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
november. There was a suggestion to create a news item which would
 inform
users that temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main
interpreter. Python ebuilds don't automatically activate Python 3, so
 I'm
not sure if the news item is required. What is your opinion about it?
  
 
  Stablise.
 
  And to pacify all the cry babies out there could we update portage tools
 to
  call /usr/bin/python2.6 directly? (yes I realise this will break, but at
 least
  it is a suggestion)   Or how about we (remove python3.1 from the
 menu)/(stick
  a big fat warning message)/(do something else) on eselect-python.  Or
 create a
  system-python link that all gentoo core apps use instead of
 /usr/bin/python
  (longer term solution?).  [rant]Hell maybe we could even start using
 those
  slot dep thingy me bobbies to depend only a slot. So ppl don't have
 python3.1
  unless something depends on it.  Does portage have support for slots in
 world?
  [/rant]

 Or we could, say, leave it ~arch.

 Why do you need python-3 in stable?


Someone here want people install paludis? because when I've switched to
python 3.0 just out of curiosity, it broke totally that python written
package manager who is portage.
So another package manager was needed to re-install a sane portage.

Still, do you really want to have it in tree as stable? Really?
Than at least please update eselect python in such a way it could not in any
case be used to choose a python version = 3


[gentoo-dev] EAPI and system packages

2009-09-19 Thread Ryan Hill
(Yes, this has EAPI in the title, so that means everyone will chime in)

I'd like to clarify and (eventually) set in stone our ideas of best practices
when it comes to bumping EAPI for system packages.  I was of the belief that
we had decided that system packages should remain at EAPI 0 for
backwards-compatibility reasons.  It seems, however, that this was never
written down anywhere and today we find ourselves in a situation where it is
impossible to bootstrap a Gentoo system from a pre-EAPI-era liveCD due to all
python versions being EAPI 1 or later.  Maybe we don't care anymore, but I'd
like to know what people think.

system packages* w/ EAPI != 0

app-shells/bash (EAPI 0 versions available)
dev-lang/python (all versions)
sys-apps/grep (EAPI 0 versions available)
sys-apps/util-linux (EAPI 0 versions available)
sys-fs/udev (EAPI 0 versions available)
sys-libs/ncurses (EAPI 0 versions available)

*(the list of system packages was determined by running emerge -ep --nodeps
@system.  your concept of system packages may vary.)

also e2fsprogs-libs is exclusively EAPI 2, but there remains in the tree a
e2fsprogs ebuild from before the split that is EAPI 0.

So, should we always keep a working EAPI 0 version around?  If not, when can
we drop support for old EAPIs?  Your opinions please.


-- 
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark.
gcc-porting,
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Stabilization of Python 3.1

2009-09-19 Thread Alistair Bush
 
 Someone here want people install paludis? because when I've switched to
 python 3.0 just out of curiosity, it broke totally that python written
 package manager who is portage.
 So another package manager was needed to re-install a sane portage.

No it wasn't. [1]  You just didn't know that ( which is completely 
understandable ).  Just as you must not have understood the implications of 
emerge -C python:2.6.  I don't want to be mean but would you like to enlighten 
us as to how you managed to unemerge python:2.6 while using python3 when 
portage didn't work with python3.
 
[1] http://tinderbox.dev.gentoo.org/default-linux/amd64/dev-lang/python-2.6.2-
r1.tbz2

 
 Still, do you really want to have it in tree as stable? Really?

Yes really.