From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 634B71381F3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 72FF3E096E; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:13:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com (mail-bk0-f46.google.com [209.85.214.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60A02E08C0 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:13:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id na10so1409189bkb.19 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:13:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=walRQ1p53DSdZ13uRKYcBW4D5feTeoAD2CPo0JmEYiY=; b=jcjn3LBzAmWrZj0jg00wemwS3c/vrb+II5Syk5yJbRNcLHQcK8odpFcaoVKgGWSd7n dbXCSRz87mdGpq9ZC3arvrocYbdhyoosGLdHmQaqi9f3ocJDJrYzAwvI8K/RthfoJNlZ rthZBJ3omA+MpjGREXEq10vce/W/475a/Op05QdqJCNTer6r7HHw/6XLGna+wdeqGfK6 f5bKcgemPaPvpZwJ7+Gvz6ykgsUi4ZKy54LZo3CJIF9Jqt4wUOnTzMVxYHEGQIy2zG+y tbeg8OlRjkmzFPZpig3GrnxJESEMnJn5PNmrS1QrUm/r91SIAFJSU9dvINXDW/lUBIFK VUMw== X-Received: by 10.205.38.195 with SMTP id tj3mr2191923bkb.67.1371500028823; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.4.18] ([5.157.117.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id oe10sm4776461bkb.1.2013.06.17.13.13.46 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BF6D40.4040102@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:10:40 +0200 From: "vivo75@gmail.com" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130610 Thunderbird/17.0.6 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 CC: Mike Gilbert Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Calling die in a subshell References: <51BC9105.5070604@gentoo.org> <20924.37728.751450.362549@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20130615182413.2e1b2f8a@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130615174230.33a7592c@googlemail.com> <20130615180129.72c2ca8b@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 277f3556-416d-4dc7-8957-e84fe0ffb497 X-Archives-Hash: 24660985d019aa0330be6c0bea6e8822 On 06/15/13 19:02, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Ciaran McCreesh > wrote: >> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:56:00 -0400 >> Mike Gilbert 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