Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for January 22

[Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1073 bytes --]

On 16:11 Thu 22 Jan     , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:10:29 -0600
> Jeremy Olexa <darkside@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > I think the spec should just be upgraded because it isn't exactly 
> > 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=3", but that would
> be messy with eclasses even if developers did know that += is a 3.1
> feature...

Can this be fixed by adding bash dependencies to things using new 
features? As long as we keep them out of the build path of bash, things 
ought to work. Then we could add a repoman check for new features, if we 
wanted.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]