Re: ansible replacement by py-ansible

2017-12-15 Thread db 
On 15 Dec 2017, at 15:41, Andrew Fernandes  wrote:
> Not in the pypi dist!

That's great. I guess, I'll have to make my own or look somewhere else.

Re: ansible replacement by py-ansible

2017-12-15 Thread db 
On 15 Dec 2017, at 05:25, Andrew Fernandes  wrote:
> patched and committed in f5a44cbcb1

Weren't there also man pages?

Re: [macports-base] 02/03: Add 'rleaves' alias

2017-12-15 Thread Joshua Root 
On 2017-11-6 12:45 , Rainer Müller wrote:
> On 11/05/2017 07:36 AM, Joshua Root wrote:
>> On 2017-11-5 16:47 , Eitan Adler wrote:
>>> On 1 March 2017 at 03:34, Rainer Müller  wrote:
 Sorry, I missed this earlier in the pull request [1], but I would be fine
 with just changing the definition of leaves. The new 'rleaves' makes more
 sense to me. Is there actually a use case for the old 'leaves', where this
 pseudo-port cannot be replaced with 'rleaves'?
>>>
>>> I sometimes abused the old leaves as a debugging tool when I needed to
>>> clear away some development ports, but not everything. That said, in
>>> almost every other use case I wanted the rleaves behavior.
> 
>> It's a longer list to go through if you're checking for ports you
>> actually want to mark as requested. Also the name "leaves" doesn't
>> really make sense with the new behaviour since it can list a lot of
>> ports that are not leaf nodes on the dependency graph.
> 
> When would you go through the old "leaves" to mark them as requested? If the
> next step was to remove unrequested ports, you could even have missed some 
> ports
> you wanted to keep, but they would then be uninstalled because did not want to
> keep another dependent.
> 
> I agree that 'leaves' does not really fit any more now that the behavior is
> always recursive. However, I do not have anything better to propose.
> Maybe "removable", "unneeded", ...?
> 
> Are there other package managers with a similar feature? I only know of apt
> which has the 'apt-get autoremove' command, which removed packages that were
> "automatically installed and are no longer required". But it does not seem to
> use a short form to describe this set either.

After some more time with this change I found another reason to dislike
it. Since 'leaves' now contains a mix of ports with dependents and
without, you can't always just uninstall a single port from the list.

I understand this new "all the stuff that can be removed" set is useful,
but I want my leaves back.

- Josh