From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LQ2Al-0004Tm-Pn for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:12:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D671E02E0; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:11:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.169]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74DCCE02E0 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:11:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 30so516457ugs.39 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:11:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=I6HHClTGNUT8WXLBRuGANLYGeQYt3g0yfvo5V2Mi50A=; b=LDWn+7K4R5n0Z23H+695PEYbeKY48bgFo4Y7XUnQZi+etNDqJcsap2Qk1gsEnQV8pC L0rrztI6+jFo8e9Y4oIGLphB6S7Bix/mPn+AsWbpJ4TbA548ZNhAlLjirwYGBFt8Oyge NrP2LxeXqtb619TAX2NGvl8ypixiToVNhyeIA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=lgRLehsIVMgRXyEje86wQWXBbe9smFOHqmePp5jJspnIdDgBSfT3NhktfH4Q4OcsN6 JCMwjRnczBxx9ZRVTQZ7/8OhcIGVpEjlm9LrHQMpEknzZOIfyOzHRLOAnYHPdMRA2XN5 MaLBuc75EZZkEVYuxVXI+p1vwWh52U/8MWmao= Received: by 10.66.244.8 with SMTP id r8mr3280982ugh.33.1232640705364; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:11:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from snowcone (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k28sm19431770ugd.15.2009.01.22.08.11.43 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:11:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:11:34 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for January 22 Message-ID: <20090122161134.7c27ed3e@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <4977F1B5.3080608@gentoo.org> References: <20090121233526.GA15870@comet> <4977E7EC.8070007@gentoo.org> <20090122033805.GA9101@hermes> <4977F1B5.3080608@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/lnOvidpvYMn.4yhjJtBK9tu"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 0174fb6d-2ba6-485c-b2a3-d05451a0ec4b X-Archives-Hash: a9032fca94b655bcefb1b0442e7acbf9 --Sig_/lnOvidpvYMn.4yhjJtBK9tu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:10:29 -0600 Jeremy Olexa wrote: > I think the spec should just be upgraded because it isn't exactly=20 > obvious to the casual dev what is a 3.0 feature vs 3.1, etc. We > already have 3.1 features in the tree, I'm not sure where the red > tape is here. The problem is, if the tree uses 3.1 and you don't have 3.1, it's a massive pain in the ass to upgrade. We waited a loooong time between 3.0 going stable and allowing it in the tree because of that. Ideally we'd say "no using 3.1 features unless EAPI=3D3", but that would be messy with eclasses even if developers did know that +=3D is a 3.1 feature... --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/lnOvidpvYMn.4yhjJtBK9tu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkl4mrkACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEUIACgxTBakXhXj9q4Z7/JS0lqTLwt O64AoM4Bskm8Dx1cRfOCXJhH8Y6cooJf =1bKW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/lnOvidpvYMn.4yhjJtBK9tu--