From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-59502-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0237138010
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 19:34:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 42727E09B0;
Wed, 3 Apr 2013 19:34:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ve0-f180.google.com (mail-ve0-f180.google.com [209.85.128.180])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 549F1E099D
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 19:34:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ve0-f180.google.com with SMTP id c13so1982916vea.39
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=RjrkJc3D/idpfAHTT9n6ETnSj/DhSFhRToNCLVjhJ2M=;
b=rCncd+laddS/Y/cQq/bP3v9hxGkSwgwHJ9XzhjZsjpzNvXzUhIw0B3i73vZIUKS0/X
SuN4snEODK6/kXsokKDKch8zSQNEz/fy3785/D79oJKIhyHwFywOHO5P74cmhwdZbSAX
ITJXYI3IttzYl+lUMEMmHVZ7B4f801Zmk6ysli8QN8jkEcHhdSaeDP4jPfPFWX21kuxI
5KgBUZM9azxZglxQz3bvKQEMYQO/siHXtqx6hbpkcuqsPbKzM2ERrbA22kdFoKLBBRzL
X2y+DQjL2osqCVXpzeu9SvVdylTAv2E2raZZsiKfyUWfsnbjX+vICYBrpZTlp/b0N+Lf
UxbQ==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.109.5 with SMTP id ho5mr2010833vdb.75.1365017670274; Wed,
03 Apr 2013 12:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.101.225 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 12:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130403180518.6696ea00@googlemail.com>
References: <20130403111437.4c1e0aa6@pomiocik.lan>
<515C219A.7090300@gentoo.org>
<20130403162948.65e37ffa@googlemail.com>
<515C6197.8010409@gentoo.org>
<20130403180518.6696ea00@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 15:34:30 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LBE2urgbBKw_dBSgdtjjcBdvnEQ
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_kppawxOv74bQ20tW-5eKmr67eXahP19254-pJXe7ohFA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] How shall we name the EAPI 6 patch applying function?
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: fe5a9ea0-f28b-4256-af13-0fd152a25a89
X-Archives-Hash: 770f305447b3f87b3233a4771eddbf1e
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:06:31 +0200
> hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> That is not possible without the agreement of the eclass maintainers.
>> So you cannot just "ban" an eclass.
>
> QA certainly can, and should. Or failing that, the Council can step in.
>
No need to have a fight.
If there are reasons not to move everything into the EAPI they should
be discussed. It takes months to implement a new EAPI in general so
the eclass maintainers will be involved I'm sure and everybody can
coordinate nicely.
And the Council already approves all EAPIs, so if for whatever reason
there is a need to make a call they can do so.
There is no need to argue about hypothetical domains of authority.
Let's instead focus on what is the best way to move forward, hope for
consensus, and then deal with disagreement only when that time comes.
Rich