Simulated example: dev-python/sqlalchemy-migrate/sqlalchemy-migrate-0.9.2.ebuild: RDEPEND: ~x86(hardened/linux/x86/selinux) ['>=dev-python/pbr-0.5.21[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '<dev-python/pbr-1.0[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/sqlalchemy-0.7.8[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', 'dev-python/decorator[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/six-1.4.1[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/tempita-0.4[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', 'dev-python/python-sqlparse[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]'] would look a lot more legible when printed like this: dev-python/sqlalchemy-migrate/sqlalchemy-migrate-0.9.2.ebuild: RDEPEND: ~x86(hardened/linux/x86/selinux) [ '>=dev-python/pbr-0.5.21[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '<dev-python/pbr-1.0[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/sqlalchemy-0.7.8[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', 'dev-python/decorator[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/six-1.4.1[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', '>=dev-python/tempita-0.4[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]', 'dev-python/python-sqlparse[python_targets_python2_7(-)?,-python_single_target_python2_7(-)]'] I'm sure bugzilla is going to mess with how this is displayed, but the idea is to put every element of the printed array on a separate line. We could even ditch the entire pythonesque array output, since that's just how python likes it and not really useful for machine or human parsing otherwise. Or do we have scrapers out there that actually rely on this output format?
I fully support this suggestion, it will prevent me from missing some package by error ;)
Created attachment 403458 [details, diff] repoman-pformat.patch Something like this.
Released in portage-2.2.20