From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1I8JX9-0000bQ-Og for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:29:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6AHSxOH006942; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:28:59 GMT Received: from smtp-3.tky.hut.fi (smtp03.tky.fi [82.130.63.73]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6AHR3wn004714 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:27:03 GMT Received: from [82.130.46.196] ([82.130.46.196]) by smtp-3.tky.hut.fi (SMSSMTP 4.1.9.35) with SMTP id M2007071020270228506 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:27:02 +0300 Message-ID: <4693C163.2020204@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:26:59 +0300 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070620) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] should we do an EAPI bump now with features that are already implemented? References: <4692B388.9030604@gentoo.org> <4692B68E.6040808@gentoo.org> <4693AD47.3060501@gentoo.org> <4693B8E7.9080602@gentoo.org> <20070710181452.3e0971a2@snowflake> In-Reply-To: <20070710181452.3e0971a2@snowflake> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 OpenPGP: url=http://users.tkk.fi/~praty/public.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigAEC0EE456C33BEE95A2D6683" X-Archives-Salt: 43724055-07ad-4378-9182-560b140bf0b5 X-Archives-Hash: 771aa5c62f2fb3d0a882afa61588eb73 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigAEC0EE456C33BEE95A2D6683 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti: > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:50:47 +0300 > Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: >> Well thinking that it will get some time to write the EAPI-1 spec and >> getting it approved by the council it will be probably useful to put >> it in initially and see where Portage is when it comes time to vote. >=20 > If EAPI-1 is slot deps and IUSE defaults, the spec can easily be done > within a day. PMS is written to allow additions of that nature to be > done trivially. >=20 Written maybe but it should be discussed on gentoo-dev too I would give a week or two at least. Regards, Petteri --------------enigAEC0EE456C33BEE95A2D6683 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGk8FjcxLzpIGCsLQRAuTpAJ0TtjSSSDkF+XV98be0VBytDxeXzQCeIWuz Jed4hNHeEf9eYwf2eKnxUGA= =TSM5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigAEC0EE456C33BEE95A2D6683-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list