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 5A6E2138010 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:52:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4B3E321C094; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:51:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F54821C087 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:51:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [200.89.69.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: aballier) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC83233DA58 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:51:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:51:05 -0300 From: Alexis Ballier To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages. Message-ID: <20121019145105.4927316b@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1350667312.12879.11.camel@belkin4> References: <20121012125315.33500bbb@sera-17.lan> <20121012211023.592e82a1@gentoo.org> <20121013082820.75d280a1@sera-17.lan> <20121016234230.3b79a2fe@gentoo.org> <1350495278.2447.33.camel@belkin4> <20121017220707.02c6f5ac@gentoo.org> <1350575341.2447.40.camel@belkin4> <1350587136.2447.47.camel@belkin4> <1350667312.12879.11.camel@belkin4> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 1a08454a-980e-44a0-be27-c329a8a5d7ac X-Archives-Hash: 36bf70e82744651c49854708ac18db97 On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 19:21:52 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: [...] > What I am trying to say is that, if we agree latest eapi is > technically better, we need to try to get it used when possible (I > mean, when, for example, eclasses are ported) for a "QA" reasoning. i think we all agree that there are improvements in newer eapis. what about filling bugs, preferably with patches, when such improvements are really needed ? like what was done for nuking built_with_use. arguing to death if 'should use latest eapi' should become 'must use latest eapi' will never get things done :)