Zac Medico posted on Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:24:29 -0800 as excerpted: > On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote: >> Now on more serious note, ideally python could be treated just like any >> other non-leaf package (in dependency tree), just like library. In such >> case it's completely reasonable to stabilize the newest version of such >> 'library', especially when it's slotted and doesn't conflict in any way >> with the rest. However, because of being used by package manager, >> python is leaf application really and it's going to be immediately >> pulled for everyone. > > It won't be pulled in by sys-apps/portage dependencies which look like > this: > > || ( dev-lang/python:2.8 dev-lang/python:2.7 dev-lang/python:2.6 >>=dev-lang/python-3 ) > > If you already have python:2.6 installed then it will not pull in a new > slot.
Won't emerge -aNuD pull it in anyway, even in a new slot, since portage says it can use it? I know I use that, so I'm always updated all the way thru the system, not just at the leaves. I know it did for me on ~arch, the reason I have it masked. So, as has already been proposed, why not stable it, while at the same time masking it, with an appropriate masking message explaining that it is stable, but we're just preventing the majority of folks from pulling it in, since they don't need it yet? That way, those who want/need it can unmask it the usual way, and everyone can continue as the were... at least until the first package requiring python-3 only comes along. Realistically, how long is that likely to be? Otherwise, what about a news item saying it's to be stabilized, and warning people that don't think they want or need it to put it in package.mask themselves? That would seem to be about the best compromise I can see ATM. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
