User talk:Leo3418/Hamcrest 2.x migration
Before creating a discussion or leaving a comment, please read about using talk pages. In particular, sign comments using
~~~~
and add new discussions at the bottom of the page. New discussions should be made visible with {{Talk|date = 2024-05-18}}.
== Discussion title == {{Talk|date = 2024-05-13}} A comment [[User:Larry|Larry]] 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC) : A reply [[User:Sally|Sally]] 11:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC) :: Another reply [[User:Larry|Larry]] 16:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC) :: Your reply ~~~~
Navigate to first: |
---|
Comment
As much I appreciate this proposal, I guess it would better be homed in a bug report, where it could be discussed and where the necessary actions could be tracked.
But, just after packaging dev-java/hamcrest I already tried to migrate what's possible. Regarding those remaining packages still depending on hamcrest-*-1.x, isn't it common sense in Gentoo to follow upstream whatever upstreams depend on? We could send upstreamable patches and keep fingers crossed ...
The problem with ... reads package <package> from both ...
I guess is homemade by java-pkg-simple.eclass generally creating classpath --with-dependencies. So far I was having this problem only once, when packaging dev-java/logback-classic.
--Vaukai (talk) 09:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Vaukai, thanks for the comment and the information you've provided! I have added a new User:Leo3418/Hamcrest 2.x migration#Possible solutions section, which I had planned to add by last night but didn't find time to do so, and I believe the first solution User:Leo3418/Hamcrest 2.x migration#Add Auto-Module-Name to dev-java/hamcrest-core should address your concerns. The first solution is also simple: it is one-off, and the change is trivial for the sake of a bug ticket. IMHO, this page is more like a complete design document that explains multiple aspects of this task; once a preferred solution is decided, I'm glad to file a bug for the actionable items should we need it. -- Leo3418 (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)