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 1S6kJ7-0006X6-H1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 15:03:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C6556E080A; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 15:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBEA0E080E for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 15:02:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p548D310B.dip.t-dialin.net [84.141.49.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8AEF1B4006 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 15:02:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F5CBE6E.5050007@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 16:02:06 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120302 Firefox/10.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.7.1 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> <4F5CA874.6070209@gentoo.org> <4F5CB8AF.6090600@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4F5CB8AF.6090600@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig7D4CE25EB1E9FC5C19F8709A" X-Archives-Salt: dc691c2c-4030-4050-9017-4467f35e5500 X-Archives-Hash: 9361ee613d2ea0469c53743d76536a12 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig7D4CE25EB1E9FC5C19F8709A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Patrick Lauer schrieb: > On 03/11/12 21:52, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Patrick Lauer wr= ote: >>> 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. >> >> Is there really much of a benefit to this?=20 >=20 > Let me phrase it like this: > Can you list all differences between EAPI 1,2,3 and 4? >=20 > It's a lot easier for everyone involved when you don't need to care > about all the special cases (like src_prepare not running) because > you've standardized on one EAPI for support >=20 > (Legacy code can be slowly phased out or upgraded, but I don't want to > remember if I can use slot-deps or use-deps and all those "irrelevant" > details) You dont have to. The suggested EAPI for new ebuilds is already the latest one and you are free to use that. On the other side, if someone wants to use some other EAPI for whatever reason, why should he not be allowed to do so? He has to maintain it and any EAPI changes. Additionally, an ebuild with a lower EAPI may already exist for a long time, this would force the dev to convert it to a newer EAPI to be allowed to add it to the main tree, also the existing ebuild works just fine. --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --------------enig7D4CE25EB1E9FC5C19F8709A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAk9cvnMACgkQG7kqcTWJkGfLcgP/UVIlIwTgm08dg9A2yr4D9xyn UO71yiTF7qkGKTh35xB8FXivuKvyA1OcgmGaUI80hi4BJQR8Q/WMJA3pk/EQtiAM ENfkIDcll5LUGdMSdxzM8v4yEssideiwi2q51v8YTFI2KEN2X5kq3aQrObicP8Ly Jr4/H6D/WP9N0fUUvKE= =gvwL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig7D4CE25EB1E9FC5C19F8709A--