svn commit: r364518 - in head: accessibility/py-papi audio/py-al devel/py-astroid devel/py-dynrules devel/py-game devel/py-logilab-common devel/py-ocempgui devel/py-ply devel/py-sdl2 devel/pychecke...

[Adam Weinberger]

On 10 Aug, 2014, at 11:56, Marcus von Appen <mva at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On, Sun Aug 10, 2014, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:55:16 +0000 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 08:55:08AM +0000, Marcus von Appen wrote:
>>>> New Revision: 364518
>>>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/364518
>>>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r364518/
>>>> 
>>>> -USES=		pkgconfig
>>>> +USES=		pkgconfig python:2
>>>> USE_GNOME=	atk
>>>> -USE_PYTHON=	2
>>>> -USE_PYDISTUTILS=yes
>>>> -PYDISTUTILS_AUTOPLIST=	yes
>>>> +PYTHON_FEATURES=autoplist distutils
>>> 
>>> Yuck, this PYTHON_FEATURES knob is ugly.  Why not follow Perl's example
>>> instead (USES=perl and USE_PERL)?  It both makes more sense and shorter.
>> 
>> ugly or not, it's a matter of taste. But PYTHON_FEATURES usage is inconsistent
>> with COMPILER_FEATURES (read only var). Could we rename it while it's not too late?
> 
> Using USE_PYTHON is a problem, since this would be inconsistent with many
> other parts of the infrastructure. Aside from that, it would need a lot of
> glue code for the transition phase.
> 
> Regardless of that, if portmgr's common suggestion is that XXX_FEATURES is
> about testing for a certain feature (read-only), I'm fine with it and open for
> suggestions, which describe that infrastructure bit X wants to enable a
> certain infrastructure feature.
> 
> PYTHON_FEATURES is in my opinion the best by far. If the consensus is to use
> USE_PYTHON, similar to USE_PERL5, this will require us to migrate all python
> ports from USE_PYTHON to USES=python first and will take some time.

Can it just treat USE_PTYHON as PYTHON_FEATURES if USES=python is defined?

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org