From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Hj2q3-0003Rd-IA for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 00:37:00 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l420a3dq020919; Wed, 2 May 2007 00:36:03 GMT Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [216.148.227.151]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l420Y8MR018627 for ; Wed, 2 May 2007 00:34:09 GMT Received: from seldon (c-67-171-130-60.hsd1.or.comcast.net[67.171.130.60]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <20070502003407m11005jq33e>; Wed, 2 May 2007 00:34:07 +0000 Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 17:34:07 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tests Message-ID: <20070502003407.GC19189@seldon> References: <200705011508.57220.peper@gentoo.org> <20070502013220.7a3ae9a4@sheridan.genone.homeip.net> <1178063216.1136.6.camel@athena.fprintf.net> <20070502005505.43bb7d43@snowflake> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4jXrM3lyYWu4nBt5" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070502005505.43bb7d43@snowflake> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Archives-Salt: 55d65fce-3af7-4710-ac03-983d9cf885fc X-Archives-Hash: 5c1ce9c32cd43a7fe70f164c2d44a038 --4jXrM3lyYWu4nBt5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:55:05AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > You're talking implementation details. This isn't the time for that! > No-one has worked out what, if anything, is to be done, so you can't > know how much work whatever it is is. >=20 > Having said that, there's no need to figure it out for the whole tree > in one go if it's an EAPI change. Please stop stating that fallacy; binding it into an EAPI version=20 means you *have* to plan for the whole tree (meaning figure it out up=20 front). Skipping the whole "plan the fall out of it" bit of EAPI versioning=20 means you wind up pushing multiple versions out (fragmenting the=20 format), or forcing changes on folks while claiming "yeah, won't=20 affect ya". ~harring --4jXrM3lyYWu4nBt5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGN9x+siLx3HvNzgcRAtZmAJsGcJX+wvCS4K+FSdgicVloGLHZHgCeN4dA yDLFDQgJYi5Tv92vLDWpDO8= =HJ8Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4jXrM3lyYWu4nBt5-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list