From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages.
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 08:31:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1350714685.12879.58.camel@belkin4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121020081430.5e1c6e9b@pomiocik.lan>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]
El sáb, 20-10-2012 a las 08:14 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 08:07:39 +0200
> Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > El vie, 19-10-2012 a las 17:43 -0300, Alexis Ballier escribió:
> > > On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:53:18 +0200
> > > Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Seriously, what people is still having problems with handling eapi4?
> > > > If there are doubts about its usage, they should be asked and resolved
> > > > instead of ignored keeping ebuilds with older eapis. The only eapi
> > > > that probably adds no advantage for a lot of ebuilds is eapi3, but
> > > > that is not the case for eapi4 for example, that includes changes
> > > > that should be incorporated by most packages in the tree, some of
> > > > them introduced by it and others inherited from older eapis.
> > > >
> > > > What is the advantage of using eapi2 over eapi4 for example? What
> > > > "hard to learn" change was included in eapi4 over eapi2?
> > >
> > > Were you around when eapi2 got out and we had a bunch of packages
> > > running econf twice because we wanted to quickly get rid of
> > > built_with_use?
> > >
> > > A 5 mins fix is a 5 mins fix, if you include an eapi bump in those 5
> > > mins then i expect crap to be committed to the tree or nothing at all.
> >
> > Of course the idea wouldn't be to deprecate older eapis as soon as newer
> > one is released but, for example, do you really think forcing people to
> > use eapi4 now would cause so many problems? We could even create a team
> > (I would join to that one of course) to help in migration process.
>
> Well, creating a team dedicated to the cause is a good idea anyway.
> Without a policy or anything like that, the team could at least work on
> improving compatibility of eclasses with new EAPIs.
>
Yes, fine
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-20 6:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-12 10:53 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages Ralph Sennhauser
2012-10-12 20:38 ` Walter Dnes
2012-10-12 20:41 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-10-12 20:45 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-10-12 21:02 ` Alexandre Rostovtsev
2012-10-13 3:10 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
2012-10-13 6:28 ` Ralph Sennhauser
2012-10-17 5:42 ` Ryan Hill
2012-10-17 17:34 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-17 19:00 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-18 4:07 ` Ryan Hill
2012-10-18 13:36 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-18 15:49 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-18 17:49 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-18 19:05 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-18 19:35 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-19 17:21 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-19 17:51 ` Alexis Ballier
2012-10-19 18:09 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-19 18:47 ` Alexis Ballier
2012-10-19 19:32 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-19 19:43 ` Thomas Sachau
2012-10-19 19:53 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-19 20:39 ` Thomas Sachau
2012-10-19 20:47 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-20 6:04 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 14:09 ` Thomas Sachau
2012-10-20 14:29 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 14:53 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 15:15 ` Thomas Sachau
2012-10-20 15:19 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 15:17 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 15:57 ` Thomas Sachau
2012-10-20 15:24 ` Rich Freeman
2012-10-19 20:43 ` Alexis Ballier
2012-10-20 6:07 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-10-20 6:14 ` Michał Górny
2012-10-20 6:31 ` Pacho Ramos [this message]
2012-10-20 14:37 ` Peter Stuge
2012-10-19 4:09 ` Ryan Hill
2012-10-19 4:34 ` Zac Medico
2013-04-12 16:25 ` [gentoo-dev] Binary package dependencies for sub-slot-less EAPIs W. Trevor King
2013-04-12 18:38 ` Rich Freeman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1350714685.12879.58.camel@belkin4 \
--to=pacho@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox