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 07F8D13888F for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 12:56:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0646E21C05C; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 12:56:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC8E521C01E for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 12:56:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iow1 with SMTP id 1so150121300iow.1 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:56:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=5Mq7a5pF+idTzHmAhPKrphSaGmanXy7Eztc/IY1Dnjk=; b=teXg1wLlta/evXOhFFyKRE4K7Jbv+2M/4fx3/pooz2/gI7zfbYV3ywQaz9xDEqmemD lztTUzAetDFDORfcqiaQW2PWewn4HzyjmD07LdcAdIRbsJclouSqCFkLBYS+dlZ1b5SN 56FaR54oHLxbxluiORriDUSOY28I+5azRjUAoQFnbO4taEJ8YJo7hFv95Tuz3W404Bl2 70N1IfSNzQYP6YAIVyWDFh+IGCs7SSuMDfOwFZdZllfxx1tDVG8jSXtgvxuS29+tEclj gI4NoeDI8l7nwgf2eUIwzGB31m51/NDDZFAgY4/yq0eeEGOH9FmBxGlxEtg7hdFcg17q PR8g== 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 X-Received: by 10.107.37.143 with SMTP id l137mr20734192iol.45.1445086586830; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.79.103.70 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:56:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <562243E0.509@gentoo.org> References: <22049.17676.1822.986579@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <56223E25.1090407@gentoo.org> <562243E0.509@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 08:56:26 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5UAspw9LLqPQmnvdYY4Ix-mZP88 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] EAPI 6 draft for review From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 0100c6d1-8dd4-4485-9bb5-18b5a3e551d4 X-Archives-Hash: 5a101fe51db48bf5c8ed1ab57ec405be On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:49 AM, hasufell wrote: > >> The other feature that is supposed to be in EAPI6 (I didn't read the >> draft yet) is that the PM should refuse to install the package if >> eapply is never called (ie src_prepare is overridden and the ebuild >> didn't call eapply). It is required that all ebuilds call it once >> unconditionally. That way users don't get inconsistent behavior from >> package to package and be dependent on maintainers to fix it. >> > > I hope that "feature" doesn't make it into EAPI6. > The council already voted it in, but of course the final spec requires approval. I don't intend to approve it without it, unless somebody makes a REALLY good case for it. Why wouldn't you want this, anyway? You're advocating for having the PM do it 100% of the time, and simultaneously arguing that if it is done via a call in the ebuild it shouldn't be 100% consistent. Those positions do not seem consistent, unless you just want EAPI6 to be broken so that you can argue for EAPI7 or whatever. -- Rich