From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S9E7c-0004ue-5m for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:18:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D27FE0BA0; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:17:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2000E0B7B for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:17:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (184.Red-79-147-154.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [79.147.154.184]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 978421B402D for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:17:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Deprecate EAPI1? From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4F5F9766.6050607@gentoo.org> References: <1331467306.11661.2.camel@belkin4> <4F5CA874.6070209@gentoo.org> <20120311135503.707de3b6@googlemail.com> <4F5CC159.1020602@gentoo.org> <20120312004935.GB7579@localhost> <4F5F9766.6050607@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-QSG6D6LwvXIMFS2OF8tc" Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 12:17:04 +0100 Message-ID: <1332069425.24045.0.camel@belkin4> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 X-Archives-Salt: 8c6ca6d8-2c76-40db-b4ff-264903f41127 X-Archives-Hash: 6e35b888bf402016406fd592c98dbaf8 --=-QSG6D6LwvXIMFS2OF8tc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El mar, 13-03-2012 a las 11:52 -0700, Zac Medico escribi=C3=B3: > On 03/11/2012 05:49 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > > If people want to enforce the eapi1 is no longer used in the gentoo=20 > > repo, that's fine- we stick a list of acceptable EAPI's into=20 > > its layout.conf. >=20 > That sounds pretty reasonable, although I think a deprecation warning > would be more appropriate that an outright ban. A deprecation warning > should be sufficient to send the intended message, without placing an > unnecessary burden on people doing simple version bumps or adding > ebuilds that are already well tested though they happen to use an older > EAPI. I fully agree with this approach=20 --=-QSG6D6LwvXIMFS2OF8tc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk9lxDAACgkQCaWpQKGI+9QkxgCeNuY03Vb8OVqfrIyWTviGjaUw PZoAn128RbMuw4+jouZOOPc3wK/yotZ1 =kkGE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-QSG6D6LwvXIMFS2OF8tc--