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 1LbdPg-00009c-Ds for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:12:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6AE2EE03A8; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.191]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 037CDE03A8 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:12:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id w8so1358907mue.6 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:12:09 -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=IhrNGMsLL60RxtVPIg+pUCj3egsvqWnLIvU7IAqcz5Y=; b=b6wlzXvC6YKg1UmEjv9RPZtZqA5QXVc1gyCzRwGIk/Pj018NAL8KbKJM+ypT/YVzrH LwByb7Uqs409Sjt7Nc60Lj+98QffpqmmeGblUbRNh3oITyZhHke4xvoidGcllLvBY0mI IApTX8tE1/Jkn5MtPV55WqjfNfAfv5Q79bWyE= 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=RtvtM+XAU2soWtN5wV6eb8IgcaQpRvYqUl0bqVfWqzWyqHiB84Rxx5gh5t3VP3HvIk 9N/ERd5jmtNaGYtTbAZ+/QA8OqvThHwyM/6qdb3VwYSCQfYTqxlh1L1cKzFa7baG4VIk c2nPATb74bgA0Ef+AgHNVDODzgzgDVY/t2wzs= Received: by 10.103.92.8 with SMTP id u8mr3433256mul.34.1235405529152; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:12:09 -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 32sm16275613ugf.19.2009.02.23.08.12.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:12:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:11:59 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) Message-ID: <20090223161159.258bbba5@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <20090223170617.27ae85ae@gentoo.org> References: <1234257125.18160.2016.camel@localhost> <20090219125124.33eaa66c@snowcone> <1235077892.13198.1923.camel@localhost> <20090222171658.278ae167@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> <49A1E1CB.1000806@gentoo.org> <20090222234800.29d64b8d@snowcone> <49A206A7.3050604@gentoo.org> <1235378286.31617.6.camel@neuromancer.neuronics-tp.ch> <49A26B84.7040006@gentoo.org> <1235383347.12908.0.camel@neuromancer.neuronics-tp.ch> <49A2B276.1000109@gentoo.org> <49A2C40D.3060601@gentoo.org> <20090223170617.27ae85ae@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_/nWDfuJappedfp3Ck/Y3bxGm"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: d2ff5fa7-24f1-42bd-9d34-773aa7a5ed77 X-Archives-Hash: 40e3ef2a3b18dfded1cadd68e5b0c776 --Sig_/nWDfuJappedfp3Ck/Y3bxGm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:06:17 +0100 Peter Alfredsen wrote: > To be honest I see no good reason for allowing manipulation of it, but > I'm sure other people will tell me why adding this requirement at this > point is wrong There's not really a good reason to allow manipulating it (and, obviously, with GLEP 55 manipulating it becomes impossible), but since for all current EAPIs it's just defined as a metadata variable that's generated in the same way as things like SLOT, manipulating it is unfortunately legal. > even though no ebuilds in the tree to the best of my knowledge use > EAPI as anything more than a declaration that's placed Just before > inherit, right after the header. People have, in the past, set EAPI inside eclasses. It's stupid and horrible, but they've done it. But here's the thing -- even if we retroactively enforce a new rule requiring it to be specified in a particular way right after the header (which is bad, since it breaks things people have already done), it *still* doesn't let us change global scope behaviour since current package managers don't extract EAPI the horrid way. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/nWDfuJappedfp3Ck/Y3bxGm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmiytEACgkQ96zL6DUtXhETVgCeL1mpzWk8a7jEarr3eCX2jvj7 2D0AoNLj/+0saV0oCZUz+Y3jD6Fs0qjY =0o39 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/nWDfuJappedfp3Ck/Y3bxGm--