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 7FD66138CE3 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:41:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35D0FE0B73; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:41:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f177.google.com (mail-ve0-f177.google.com [209.85.128.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 475EDE0B67 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:41:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f177.google.com with SMTP id jz11so4888923veb.8 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:41:13 -0800 (PST) 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=pVN5VRoeXxIqw3W1ac6WNhkvugc1o29RhnCgQIxIQ2c=; b=R1n7NLN/tv2lL30+vagCyRuSsDNdKTSfwrR+aUjk9UsKVYWcAg1skeJiEWCVKbqd0z 1GdxmXlSbWHFKsqUkBKAK9o5ARiXaawJepESN1M0skbRzzTS37ih5cXgm3sCMwziLK6W CfSP6dLEEVcEQz8w2QSFnlsVjOHPtBiNENyS76oa5cSs3cih9Lw+Z0E3bB5cyxuLtrHj ZmISOJX1+4dOX8iRLPQfwcmBhNwDdi6kYZFx4OEczpujQL/5uzR8jAmxG8wr/5rsueph 6vvZiSowdWAwtC2Td2xNqwrVOf0ufBaz4+YWfVaicbPrbQclypI1axceGWcpfoeWg3RV geEA== 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 10.58.255.233 with SMTP id at9mr7119954ved.20.1392043273435; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:41:13 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.254.198 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 06:41:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140210152358.00eeb1ed@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> References: <52F8C97D.4030403@gentoo.org> <20140210142159.711c3f46@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140210152358.00eeb1ed@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:41:13 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9h9giGKI-_BlpAzfbWhZxBc1eVs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Tightening EAPI rules From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 97424b30-b05f-4c41-9239-2cdf39da3818 X-Archives-Hash: 38f8c6edfcf5e5287eb4e8dde8ef776a On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > Well, that package maintainers are called developers on Gentoo isn't > helping the interpretation here; regardless of how one defines those, > both maintainers and PM implementers have to be taken into account here. > > From quick thoughts the latter are a bit more affected than the former, > but perhaps Patrick can highlight what he sees as a burden. You would think, but the reason I raised the question was that historically every time this has come up the package manager maintainers usually chime in and say that they don't consider it a problem. I want to do whatever I can to make them happy since we are so desperately in need of more of them, but... Rich