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 1S6ipv-00057D-Rb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:29:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6CE53E0769; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:29:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921A4E074E for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:28:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.5] (unknown [180.158.45.139]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B90711B4004 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F5CA874.6070209@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:28:20 +0800 From: Patrick Lauer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120301 Thunderbird/10.0.1 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] Deprecate EAPI1? References: <1331467306.11661.2.camel@belkin4> In-Reply-To: <1331467306.11661.2.camel@belkin4> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: da85087e-6728-4465-ae7d-617e97ddf244 X-Archives-Hash: b3b9829b868ad36d56b77cab7f07f6b6 On 03/11/12 20:01, Pacho Ramos wrote: > After reading previous discussion: > http://help.lockergnome.com/linux/gentoo-dev-Deprecate-EAPIs--ftopict530567.html > > Looks like preventing NEW commits from using eapi1 (via repoman) could > be done without major issues. This could even being done also for eapi2 > as it's close enough to eapi3, but I don't have a strong opinion about > eapi2 deprecation (personally, I try to always use latest eapi if eclass > allows me to do so). > > Any thoughts on this? I'd deprecate eapi2 too, we don't need 5 flavours around when we effectively only want to support one (and eapi0 in a few places) I wouldn't mind having a deprecation timeline for eapi3 too (now +6 months maybe?), but there's no need to rush things.