From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26C741382C5 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 21:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 41326E09F7; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 21:35:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pg0-x22f.google.com (mail-pg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22f]) (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 D71A2E09F0 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 21:35:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id l131so50009pga.2 for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2018 13:35:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=JlqcBjEDjoZfmreAuigYxqoq5R75SOG9lAMeb8TXAcQ=; b=UvutNzNmkHeeWMgyH3CKxRW6Dm6ycqmJHWiT568QGPrlsI2/HkAQIS7HbOS8oq3YzL a369dl9C4UPRwMe05ud4GhgmpHdWTa2dV7Piqy+NDT0BXACD/l6jMYAxzwRzCOzpKqYm GQq2Jz0WgLMzcuQ9/2IrggaA3cERsScKcs59aIwj0y6PSG1EL5fmgF36gkm1swu+jrEh YoDPrVVL+sBwmr8V/sMMIm4r/oyBoUImxQMQ/lFbd7bsACXBtTN+x0tjXmViKFaNjc8V H5u1i40Dc6ElZVtQm88cSf2gbJ7mKqKNCIVhunQkb8DtqlbNffRZ992R+qshHjukMarK VWfg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JlqcBjEDjoZfmreAuigYxqoq5R75SOG9lAMeb8TXAcQ=; b=eHo0969dRVgIK/uF1FGMQ9EN+0249nKidQ4jUvA/gHm/ExEjgaAZJnmaVs1sBKQnzo hFvkXKbdv3pi5t04A4s0nG3o2va+gqxlJ0QVEpSu5WxkCP9u6O4NXnOyYuKWN+6Vj+MG soTSImCXVX59bBWhOPXs5T4t9QlrIb5f7K4lLSjmgKyuGHYWJJf9NImfwvQuUj4HF9pf zk9gSaEz6tpeDj+LGgZBuHBMHbwN9iZUPyzRxbhlVIHEp3P3fTjoxJPJ/obWitqyKsA5 8uniq2hL1qwCx7oE3G6fXhV5nv6BQU1bCrhY4NnBsn6C6pnFeKisBHUkbTzwy+gwcC7Q y9/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPAwdV/TGg+eMg+kufeGcsm4N5bhozOuCcixk2MKy2LaF58nNXOj H/8k7S0h3ZrFJKGK7m8h4GgNEgR6xCofxLKMTDksLw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtPpuep02CKK0ShNAKzdpY1VdKx39Nrd63zHYTQq4vtmxmy+ouB0CiXoYViPHPAit2jCY4fny5MTIFBlbA1/j4= X-Received: by 10.99.173.71 with SMTP id y7mr16033483pgo.432.1520372122021; Tue, 06 Mar 2018 13:35:22 -0800 (PST) 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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.166.8 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 13:35:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <32379196.J1ePdnhnO0@pinacolada> References: <32379196.J1ePdnhnO0@pinacolada> From: Rich Freeman Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 16:35:21 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Zq9FzD0Yy39NCSP1SdWf9DX49AA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Is removing old EAPIs worth the churn? To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: a38f9941-8cf6-49d6-b7b1-e38b64798316 X-Archives-Hash: e2059644faf04a3cea04e029230859f9 On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Is it worth the effort? Yes, see below. > Is it a high priority task? No. > It sounds like all that has been done is to log a tracker and create some bugs. That is hardly a major burden on anybody. If it nudges people to bump the EAPI when they're doing other work so much the better, but there doesn't seem to be a drop-dead date yet. If devs don't want to think about EAPI cleanup they don't have to right now. The delta as you get to more recent EAPIs hasn't been quite as extreme as in the early ones, so this should hopefully become simpler as we go along... -- Rich