Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Michał Górny]

W dniu sob, 03.03.2018 o godzinie 14∶50 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller
napisał:
> > > > > > On Sat, 03 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> > I don't really want to go into this. As far as I'm concerned, I can
> > leave defunct '-d' and just check dev profiles unconditionally.
> 
> WFM. Or even better, leave defunct -d/--include-dev in place (in order
> not to break peoples' scripts) and add a long --no-include-dev option.
> 

...which would be inconsistent with -e/--include-exp-profiles.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Ulrich Mueller]

> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:

> I don't really want to go into this. As far as I'm concerned, I can
> leave defunct '-d' and just check dev profiles unconditionally.

WFM. Or even better, leave defunct -d/--include-dev in place (in order
not to break peoples' scripts) and add a long --no-include-dev option.

Ulrich


pgppFpmvLee_2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Michał Górny]

W dniu sob, 03.03.2018 o godzinie 13∶08 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller
napisał:
> > > > > > On Sat, 03 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > It seems counter-intuitive for a simple binary option to require an
> > > argument. What is wrong with specifying -d to enable the option,
> > > and simply not specifying it to disable?
> > What is wrong is that a number of developers have historically not
> > specified the option and broke stuff. Plus, it's infinitely silly to
> > require people to explicitly specify the option to enable required
> > behavior.
> 
> My remark was about syntax, not about semantics. "-d y" and "-d n"
> instead of "-d" and "(nothing)" is a crappy user interface.
> 
> Maybe unify things into "--include-profiles=" (with a
> comma separated list of "stable", "dev", and "exp") or
> "--include-profile-level=" with n=0 for stable, n=1 for stable+dev,
> etc.?
> 

I don't really want to go into this. As far as I'm concerned, I can
leave defunct '-d' and just check dev profiles unconditionally.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Ulrich Mueller]

> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:

>> It seems counter-intuitive for a simple binary option to require an
>> argument. What is wrong with specifying -d to enable the option,
>> and simply not specifying it to disable?

> What is wrong is that a number of developers have historically not
> specified the option and broke stuff. Plus, it's infinitely silly to
> require people to explicitly specify the option to enable required
> behavior.

My remark was about syntax, not about semantics. "-d y" and "-d n"
instead of "-d" and "(nothing)" is a crappy user interface.

Maybe unify things into "--include-profiles=" (with a
comma separated list of "stable", "dev", and "exp") or
"--include-profile-level=" with n=0 for stable, n=1 for stable+dev,
etc.?

Ulrich


pgpRefoLzQiiY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Michał Górny]

W dniu sob, 03.03.2018 o godzinie 12∶48 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller
napisał:
> > > > > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
> 
>  
> > parser.add_argument(
> > '-d', '--include-dev-profiles', choices=('y', 'n'), 
> > metavar='',
> > -   default='n',
> > +   default='y',
> > help='include dev profiles in dependency checks')
> 
> It seems counter-intuitive for a simple binary option to require an
> argument. What is wrong with specifying -d to enable the option, and
> simply not specifying it to disable?
> 

What is wrong is that a number of developers have historically not
specified the option and broke stuff. Plus, it's infinitely silly to
require people to explicitly specify the option to enable required
behavior.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] repoman: Enable testing dev profiles by default

[Ulrich Mueller]

> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:
 
>   parser.add_argument(
>   '-d', '--include-dev-profiles', choices=('y', 'n'), 
> metavar='',
> - default='n',
> + default='y',
>   help='include dev profiles in dependency checks')

It seems counter-intuitive for a simple binary option to require an
argument. What is wrong with specifying -d to enable the option, and
simply not specifying it to disable?

Ulrich


pgpXXL5a128zO.pgp
Description: PGP signature