From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 481AB138010 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B22F9E04AB; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F34AE02C4 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69BB333D78F for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:03:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.671 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.671 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.299, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.37, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1Cv8vFSZTRS3 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:03:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69AF633D777 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:03:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TOhKL-0007MS-Ih for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:03:21 +0200 Received: from 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca ([71.17.69.121]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:03:21 +0200 Received: from dirtyepic by 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:03:21 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages. Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 22:07:07 -0600 Message-ID: <20121017220707.02c6f5ac@gentoo.org> References: <20121012125315.33500bbb@sera-17.lan> <20121012211023.592e82a1@gentoo.org> <20121013082820.75d280a1@sera-17.lan> <20121016234230.3b79a2fe@gentoo.org> <1350495278.2447.33.camel@belkin4> 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-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/U.CeweZO8o/RLnrvS6oYnRV"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: e7b6f01d-0342-48c2-a19e-28f51e770615 X-Archives-Hash: 367a3ae74fa481130233199436198806 --Sig_/U.CeweZO8o/RLnrvS6oYnRV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:00:12 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Would be easier to prune old versions if we "force" them to be less > > using at least preventing new ebuilds to use them. For example, what is > > the advantage for a new ebuild to still rely on old src_compile phase > > instead of src_prepare/configure...? >=20 > It can be bumped by copying it from the ebuild for the previous > version, thus introducing no errors. Yeah, someone could be making a small change (eg. adding a patch that requires a revbump) to a package they don't maintain and aren't familiar with. Forcing them to port/rewrite the ebuild isn't going to make anyone happy. > I think the whole developers-can't-handle-47-EAPIs thing is a red > herring. The fact that there are packages written in Erlang in the > tree doesn't cause me any issues even though I haven't had to do any > work in Erlang. If I ever wanted to maintain such a package then I'd > take the time to learn it as needed. Likewise, if I wanted to > maintain a package that used EAPI joe and I really prefer to work in > EAPI fred, then I'd revise it at my next convenience. Well, it's not just about ebuilds you maintain. Think about something like the gcc-porting trackers where you have to touch a lot of ebuilds across the tree. You really do have to have a working knowledge of the differences between EAPIs to do so. My browser bookmark to the EAPI cheatsheet is one of the more frequently used as it is. --=20 gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets we were never more here, expanse getting broa= der @ gentoo.org but bigger boats been done by less wa= ter --Sig_/U.CeweZO8o/RLnrvS6oYnRV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlB/gGsACgkQiqiDRvmkBmIDywCePtuyfTs9ADA1q9k1VSQw/mr9 NYUAoOXfzhOy8g9EAUJXZHxVvqWkq1Jk =4Tcy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/U.CeweZO8o/RLnrvS6oYnRV--