From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-37589-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Mhmhb-0001kp-Nn
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:52:24 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B5BBE096E;
Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:01:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ew0-f218.google.com (mail-ew0-f218.google.com [209.85.219.218])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4C9E096E
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:01:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ewy18 with SMTP id 18so3771152ewy.14
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
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=SY0UveCxOwk+FsDBcktGuVT50qP7RHRhCEFS7pzJsYY=;
b=p+0CMzqSFFI/cqexEme9zL5jetiKmFtOp6vFuS7LoEsmVZddp+kx61MraxhcrbtS8q
0yxv8PM/r5NDKa2ZTDTkhPF/dmGvY0sl+Kz6qn1iv7T1fgApUNQOEFbLhcRHc34MJe0r
hqohzSXKDgQ+WtvX1AWkujQNwBUFAe8KSusks=
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=DuckAHcdqriBkAdc8LHPGTWcLycsduaW8ocVz4E/SMhftBgxXhICSPiaSzWbiYhIJY
wYtV6RfQoWIVdK21LnXyhzG8ArmaqcFXVWn47IZgFul3hoohOxbt3LgO9U6amqt1Kuk/
RFcCRxST5qVLcLxYnFen2sb1O3a9XK52/j+d0=
Received: by 10.210.87.16 with SMTP id k16mr3528534ebb.2.1251666078586;
Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snowcone (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm3088707eyb.12.2009.08.30.14.01.18
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:01:12 +0100
From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Road towards EAPI 3 main tree approval
Message-ID: <20090830220112.3a3620b8@snowcone>
In-Reply-To: <4A9ADB1E.6070801@gentoo.org>
References: <4A9ADB1E.6070801@gentoo.org>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.2 (GTK+ 2.16.5; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1;
boundary="Sig_/Li.oi8ILqS4Z.wzDNRoDuwu"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Archives-Salt: 4d4ff98e-86ce-49ab-be95-3540057457d8
X-Archives-Hash: 176b6a3281ed13da8de2620c11fea89a
--Sig_/Li.oi8ILqS4Z.wzDNRoDuwu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:03:42 +0300
Petteri R=C3=A4ty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> As far as I understand paludis already has the features implemented so
> maybe we could give EAPI 3 some field testing in some overlays to see
> how it works in practice from ebuild writer point of view.
The main issue with that is eclasses. Quite a few eclasses have
hard-coded lists of 'case ${EAPI:-0} in' lists. These would need to be
updated. So if you go this route:
> 20:01 < zmedico> Betelgeuse: I'd guess they could test it as
> EAPI=3Dpaludis-3_pre or something like that
then you'll have to clutter up the main tree with paludis-3_pre. And if
instead you call it '3', it means we have to guarantee we're not going
to make any last minute changes.
Also, as I recall there're two outstanding issues with EAPI 3 that
would need to be addressed by the Council.
First, there's the question of package.mask etc as directories. Some
people were after either doing a quicky EAPI 2.1 or reopening EAPI 3 to
allow that for the 10.0 profiles. I don't know whether that's still
considered worth doing or whether it's an EAPI 4 thing.
Second, there's the issue with 'nonfatal' and 'die' [1]. EAPI 3 as
originally worded made 'die' ignore 'nonfatal' (so that people wouldn't
have to modify all their eclass functions to take into account that
suddenly callers could override their dies), but some crappy wording in
the original spec (which has been addressed) meant that some people
didn't realise that, and would prefer it if we did that differently.
> Paludis does not recognize it atm but probably easy to get a new
> revision/version out:
Yup, can do that easily enough if there's interest once the above has
been addressed.
[1]: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_358b12a494173ab82f3e7d1b2b6b=
5bf9.xml
--=20
Ciaran McCreesh
--Sig_/Li.oi8ILqS4Z.wzDNRoDuwu
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkqa6JoACgkQ96zL6DUtXhFQSwCePm0I90JUwH14mezTV2ZUCAVu
NjkAoMri0KZCCMq7syRfKzVMee/pw7h9
=jyGZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Sig_/Li.oi8ILqS4Z.wzDNRoDuwu--