Re: [gentoo-dev] Calling die in a subshell

["vivo75@gmail.com" <vivo75@gmail.com>]

On 06/15/13 19:02, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
> <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:56:00 -0400
>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> If we find that all known implementations of PMS/EAPI 4 have
>>> implemented a certain behavior, making a change to that version of PMS
>>> to properly document the behavior seems reasonable.
>> Part of the point of EAPI stability is that it doesn't just apply to
>> current versions of package manglers.
>>
> So look back at the first versions which implemented EAPI 4 support,
> and see what the behavior was implemented at the point in time.
>
it make sense but it stretch things a lot.

Is it possible to:
- keep an open bug (tracker) on named eclasses/ebuilds, so we (users and
devs) know that there is a (teoric) fallacy
- approve it for EAPI 6
- move all the eapi/ebuilds to EAPI 6
- close the bugs as WONT-FIX

In any case it should be easy to port an ebuild from EAPI4 to 6, if
gentoers want to keep things simple it could be more a version 5a than 6

regards