From: Richard Yao <ryao@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: My wishlist for EAPI 5
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:23:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE2E81B.5070107@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pan.2012.06.21.08.29.08@cox.net>
On 06/21/2012 04:29 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted:
>
>> On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao <ryao@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> POSIX Shell compliance
>>> So far as I know, every PM relies heavily upon bash anyway (and can't
>>> easily be made not to), so even if developers would accept having to
>>> rewrite all their eclasses, it still wouldn't remove the dep.
>>>
>> Lets address POSIX compliance in the ebuilds first. Then we can deal
>> with the package managers.
> Additionally, this is extremely unlikely because a number of developers
> insist on bash, to the extent that it would likely split gentoo in half
> if this were to be forced. It wouldn't pass council. It's unlikely to
> even /get/ to council.
>
> Openrc could move to POSIX shell because its primary dev at the time
> wanted it that way and it's only a single package. However, even then,
> doing it was controversial enough that said developer ended up leaving
> gentoo in-part over that, tho he did continue to develop openrc as a
> gentoo hosted project for quite some years. Now you're talking trying to
> do it for /every/ (well, almost every) package, thus touching every
> single gentoo dev. It's just not going to happen in even the medium term
> (say for argument APIs 5-7ish), let alone be something practical enough
> to implement, soon enough (even if everyone agreed on the general idea,
> they don't), to be anything like conceivable for EAPI5.
>
> So just let that one be. It's simply not worth tilting at that windmill.
>
> (Arguably, multi-arch, while practical and actually working at least with
> portage in an overlay, fails that last bit as well. If it was pushed,
> perhaps for EAPI6 or 7, but it's just not practical to consider it for
> EAPI5... unless you want to wait 3-5 years for EAPI5!)
>
It is just a wish list.
Anyway, people need to decide on what they want from a new EAPI before
one is made. Once they decide, it should be possible to work out the
details.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-21 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-20 20:25 [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 Richard Yao
2012-06-20 20:35 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 20:50 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-20 20:54 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 21:02 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-20 21:10 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 21:05 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-20 21:12 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 21:34 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-21 8:29 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2012-06-21 9:23 ` Richard Yao [this message]
2012-06-22 0:38 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-22 5:30 ` Duncan
2012-06-22 5:55 ` Michał Górny
2012-06-22 6:20 ` Ben de Groot
2012-06-20 21:43 ` [gentoo-dev] " Justin
2012-06-21 6:08 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-21 7:00 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-21 7:25 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-21 7:39 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 7:53 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 9:38 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 9:53 ` Peter Stuge
2012-06-23 10:24 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 10:30 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 10:31 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 11:05 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 11:14 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 11:38 ` Peter Stuge
2012-06-23 11:37 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 11:52 ` Peter Stuge
2012-06-23 11:59 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 12:16 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 12:21 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 12:11 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 12:16 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 12:33 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-23 10:37 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2012-06-23 10:43 ` Duncan
2012-06-23 10:44 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 11:12 ` Rich Freeman
2012-06-23 23:09 ` Duncan
2012-06-21 9:27 ` [gentoo-dev] " Alec Warner
2012-06-21 12:04 ` Rich Freeman
2012-06-23 8:19 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-21 11:15 ` Patrick Lauer
2012-06-21 11:37 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-23 8:01 ` Pacho Ramos
2012-06-21 12:11 ` Homer Parker
2012-06-21 12:30 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-21 13:13 ` Homer Parker
2012-06-21 13:20 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-21 20:26 ` Homer Parker
2012-06-21 22:46 ` Rich Freeman
2012-06-29 5:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-29 5:29 ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-21 6:41 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-21 7:24 ` justin
2012-06-21 12:14 ` Homer Parker
2012-06-21 12:38 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 20:39 ` Maxim Kammerer
2012-06-20 20:41 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2012-06-20 20:51 ` Richard Yao
2012-06-29 5:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-20 20:52 ` Luca Barbato
2012-06-20 21:33 ` Alec Warner
2012-06-21 9:42 ` Ben de Groot
2012-06-29 5:25 ` Mike Frysinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FE2E81B.5070107@gentoo.org \
--to=ryao@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox