Hi, On 2019-09-04 20:59, Michał Górny wrote: > Devmanual is pretty clear on the fact that *all* new eclasses require ml > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > review *before* committing:
I am also working on a new eclass so I looked up details regarding what's needed to add a new eclass recently. I must say that I disagree that it's *pretty* clear. > Adding and Updating Eclasses > > Before committing a new eclass to the tree, it should be emailed > ^^^^^^ > to the gentoo-dev mailing list with a justification and a > proposed implementation. Do not skip this step — sometimes a > better implementation or an alternative which does not require a > new eclass will be suggested. > > Before updating [...] > > The exceptions to this rule are per-package eclasses. For > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > example, the apache-2 eclass is only used by the www-servers/apache > package, and thus does not typically require changes to be emailed > for review. In my case I am working on a new mysql eclass to outsource pkg_config function which is shared at least between dev-db/mysql and dev-db/percona-server (and maybe dev-db/mariadb). For this new eclass I would say it's a "per-package" eclass and would probably have skipped mailing list review, too. If you want to make it clear, change "should" to "must" and maybe clarify per-package exception and limit to update case if you believe that really *all* *new* eclasses must be send to mailing list. -- Regards, Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
