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 3439B138010 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:35:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9CF13E0138; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E3CE011A for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f53.google.com with SMTP id jg15so3999258bkc.40 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:35:03 -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 :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=jvFUdO/VO1OVfHwVoQTO/KmWz59sLzU2awYk0gScGic=; b=hAT4snh0YFS9x0qkfY4BYM8jmmLYjqRewJPt4sxEK/drpiStYmy8HW9dYXnpp0REEn 0vhcqJ2/NMfWSd4dt0o8IXBL5gonnVHuxl3mdcmoe8jC6Z0tCOd+N7swZb6IBYw2Utq/ GRgKmbz0wZ1Ffm71QtxzaanO65qtTIO0HVAQbG+4BlOwfXlv/9vj+e881ETrn5A5P1xp lZi2gNykViWXNK/D1k2kNORtk1D13uahmup+11ztJxKXm0vwuzHdcuUv830hANADd/0A tgtkSNhsyuq9WCKMl16QApbhkRP+IM1TloehZBWs0xTt/Ym8coYr6/pcvCZdZNpIc0/m B54g== 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 Received: by 10.204.146.10 with SMTP id f10mr6575074bkv.98.1350588903106; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.156.147 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:35:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1350587136.2447.47.camel@belkin4> References: <20121012125315.33500bbb@sera-17.lan> <20121012211023.592e82a1@gentoo.org> <20121013082820.75d280a1@sera-17.lan> <20121016234230.3b79a2fe@gentoo.org> <1350495278.2447.33.camel@belkin4> <20121017220707.02c6f5ac@gentoo.org> <1350575341.2447.40.camel@belkin4> <1350587136.2447.47.camel@belkin4> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:35:03 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AgHAXVu9-aZMxOfCuyeuFWMQhP4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages. From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 4b0169ef-93f1-4437-8d53-2a22922d9290 X-Archives-Hash: 5124dfbbe8661d453c4c42cd9592b990 On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Personally I see no major difficult in moving to eapi4, what exact > difficult are you (I mean people still sticking with eapi0/1) seeing? It is harder than cp. :) If I write a new ebuild I would always target the most recent EAPI. However, if I'm just doing a revbump, why fix what ain't broken? That is rhetorical. I do understand your logic. However, if it takes me 15min to do something now, and it might take me 15min to do it later, I'll take later every time since who knows if the package will even be around later. Rich