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 ) id 1RcYcZ-0001Oe-Fg for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:30:55 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C370821C3CE; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:30:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1AE21C0E0 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:30:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-253-147-68.adsl.inetia.pl [77.253.147.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5C081B4005; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:31:04 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: pacho@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: deprecate /usr/share/doc/$PF Message-ID: <20111219093104.3cdad034@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <1324249665.2962.2.camel@belkin4> References: <20111218230205.4df86707@pomiocik.lan> <1324249665.2962.2.camel@belkin4> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.8; 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; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/ywF+qUeAVBJ_npT2Vl3rovt"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 847e9b42-5a28-4608-ada9-06c3a75b8efb X-Archives-Hash: 6bc994e2a83ad10fe89c8270d9fb2fa0 --Sig_/ywF+qUeAVBJ_npT2Vl3rovt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:07:45 +0100 Pacho Ramos wrote: > El dom, 18-12-2011 a las 23:02 +0100, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny escribi=C3= =B3: > [...] > > > Q6: Why can't the dodoc/dohtml path be changed before EAPI-5? > > > A6: Because the path where dodoc and dohtml install files is part > > > of the PMS. Portage can't just change it on its own. A possible > > > workaround for current EAPIs is adding new-style dodoc/dohtml > > > analogues to an eclass. > >=20 > > I think some of devs agree we should be allowed to fix past mistakes > > without waiting another 20 years till the tree is migrated to a new > > EAPI... > >=20 >=20 > Maybe this situation could be improved if there was a policy forcing > us to try to use latest EAPI when possible for any package update, > that way we would move faster to latest eapi and even deprecate older > eapis easily Still unlikely. A bunch of old eclasses will force ebuilds to be EAPI 0 or so. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/ywF+qUeAVBJ_npT2Vl3rovt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk7u9k0ACgkQfXuS5UK5QB2JgwP/YK4gfMkzfG1tJHYrDpsn70kp HDmaCh3VAPoNKuD/akR3PQlKhr6YwcZw2LPFib/aJvjhJY74hADLA93mkEQQcUAR u5IdVi3fv2NFNLYnQkKHAVbVrwL/ew62dHWNopUIAnmE2CAFNWZh/yuae1AoSa3w Vn28sXMrr2bWMoVNRA0= =ecEv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/ywF+qUeAVBJ_npT2Vl3rovt--