Am Samstag, den 22.08.2009, 01:54 +0100 schrieb AllenJB:
> From what I've seen here, at least part of the problem here stems from
> the fact that this feature won't be considered until EAPI-4, and that
> means it might be a long way off yet. This, in my mind, raises the
> question of whether the current PMS/EAPI process is too slow in certain
> circumstances and could it be modified to speed things up when deemed
> necessary?
> 
> Could there be room for "fast track" EAPI's to be considered on some
> occasions - eg. in this case an EAPI-2.1 which is simply EAPI-2 with the
> "package.* as directory in profiles" feature included?
> 
> If this is a matter of what the council has decided, would a simple
> solution be to have a motion for amendment / fast-track of EAPI2.1 (or
> alternative solution) brought up and voted on by the council?

As you can see currently, most time is needed to implemente the features
in portage. It therefore doesn't make sense to make the EAPI process
even faster. On the other hand, I think it would make sense to have a
separate group developing new EAPIs instead of the council.

Cheers,
Tiziano

-- 
Tiziano Müller
Gentoo Linux Developer
Areas of responsibility:
  Samba, PostgreSQL, CPP, Python, sysadmin, GLEP Editor
E-Mail   : dev-zero@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5  4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30