Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2013-01-08

["Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1278 bytes --]

Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012, 20:03:49 schrieben Sie:
> > The idea would be *for the transition period*: have an additional
> > directory
> > base5, which contains eapi=5, the stable mask files and nothing else.
> > 
> > After the transition period, these files are merged into the main profile
> > directory, the base5 directory is removed from inheritance and deleted.
> > 
> > During the transition period, an old installation using deprecated 10.0
> > profile will "not see the stable mask files", which means the additional
> > useflag restrictions are just not enforced. Repoman will check against
> > non-
> > deprecated profiles, which means it uses the 13.0 path.
> 
> Well, I guess it's acceptable. I think it's fine assuming that stable
> users don't enable flags relevant to packages not being stable.

OK then unless someone brings up valid points against this, let's suggest for 
the upcoming meeting that Council decides 

* whether to implement solution a) as discussed in preceeding e-mails
* and if yes, how long the waiting time between deprecation of 10.0 and 
removal of 10.0 shall be.

[Alternative name for the eapi-5 directory: eapi5-base instead of base5 ?]

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]