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 1R59um-0002R4-7A for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 05:27:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BCB9621C075; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 05:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B76A21C036 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 05:26:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.4] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D16DB1B4009 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 05:26:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E758121.8020002@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 22:26:57 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110827 Thunderbird/6.0 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Fwd: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for items for September 13 council meeting References: <4E64C7BB.907@gentoo.org> <201109160122.00747.Arfrever.FTA@gmail.com> <20110915235444.GB31364@beast> <201109160220.27814.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <4E73BA52.3000501@gentoo.org> <20110918034735.GA4525@comet.mayo.edu> In-Reply-To: <20110918034735.GA4525@comet.mayo.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 29f455e2fc5cd8e6b74257d6b7ecf8b9 On 09/17/2011 08:47 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On 14:06 Fri 16 Sep , Zac Medico wrote: >> Bumping the EAPI of the root profiles/eapi file would be a different >> matter, since it applies to the whole repository. If you want to >> version bump that repository-level EAPI, then you need to wait until >> at least 6 months after supporting package managers have been >> available in stable. > > So in your opinion, it would be fine to bump profiles/eapi to EAPI=4 > now? Yes, it's feasible. As a consequence, we may get some complaints from users who haven't upgraded during the last six months. For users like these, we could take a snapshot of the tree before the EAPI is bumped, and archive it so they can use it to update their package manager to a version that supports the new EAPI. -- Thanks, Zac