* Re: [gentoo-dev] Eclass vs EAPI For Utility Functions (Patching/etc)
@ 2014-06-19 17:03 99% ` William Hubbs
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: William Hubbs @ 2014-06-19 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 889 bytes --]
Hi all:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 07:00:15AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> During the council meeting there was a bit of a philosophical debate
> over the proper role of EAPI vs implementing functions in eclasses. I
> felt that it was important enough to at least get more community input
> before we continue voting on features like user patching/etc which
> tend to favor an EAPI-based approach.
I am strongly in favor of the eapi-based approach as well, for all of
the reasons mentioned in the thread so far.
Eclasses can and should be used for functions, imo, that are used by
some ebuilds, but once it is determined that functionality in an eclass has
potential for very wide use, that functionality should be moved into an
eapi. The eutils functions are a prime example of this. These are
general purpose functions, so there is no reason for them to be kept in
an eclass.
William
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-06-15 11:00 [gentoo-dev] Eclass vs EAPI For Utility Functions (Patching/etc) Rich Freeman
2014-06-19 17:03 99% ` William Hubbs
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox