jeremy at lavergne.gotdns.org
Tue Dec 28 15:06:16 PST 2010
On Dec 28, 2010, at 17:54 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I'm not sure what we should do about these Python versions... Seems like moving everything to a newer version is a good move, but Joshua's right, if it's not done all at once, it can cause weirdness. And doing it all at once is hard since ports are maintained by different people.
> For example, I might like to use Python 2.7 for PlasmaClient, but it needs Python support in Boost, and Boost uses a variant to specify the Python version. So I'd probably need to look at all other dependents of Boost and make sure that those that use Python also are upgraded to use Python 2.7.
> Python is an area of MacPorts I've tried not to become too knowledgeable about; I had hoped others interested in Python would take over that area.
It would make sense to me that we include an overall port "python" much like we do for perl, except rather than just a port dependency on a specific version we should also have a PortGroup dependency. A generic python portgroup would be handy (which then has a PortGroup dependency on pythonXX) and allow all ports to just include specific flags for the current version of python, but if a port needs a specific version they simply include pythonXX.
The PortGroup portion is key to this idea because it can define complete paths (recently seen in KDE4 PortGroup) for nearly all flags. This avoids collisions across versions of python, and ensures only the specific pythons are used. It further gives us a single upgrade point that is sorely needed.
Of course, the PortGroups already provide us with version suffixes in names, another bonus we should keep around.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3749 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the macports-dev