From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-34444-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1LbZeR-0004qZ-6V
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:11:11 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 40E21E020C;
	Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:11:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rv-out-0708.google.com [209.85.198.240])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C10E020C
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:11:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id f25so1954388rvb.46
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:11:09 -0800 (PST)
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
Received: by 10.142.48.14 with SMTP id v14mr1927542wfv.103.1235384880738; Mon, 
	23 Feb 2009 02:28:00 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1235383347.12908.0.camel@neuromancer.neuronics-tp.ch>
References: <1234257125.18160.2016.camel@localhost>
	 <20090219125124.33eaa66c@snowcone>
	 <1235077892.13198.1923.camel@localhost>
	 <20090222171658.278ae167@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca>
	 <49A1E1CB.1000806@gentoo.org> <20090222234800.29d64b8d@snowcone>
	 <49A206A7.3050604@gentoo.org>
	 <1235378286.31617.6.camel@neuromancer.neuronics-tp.ch>
	 <49A26B84.7040006@gentoo.org>
	 <1235383347.12908.0.camel@neuromancer.neuronics-tp.ch>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:28:00 +0900
Message-ID: <efeb8d230902230228s1e9f1f06ja5e1e90f5f13d005@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] 
	Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009)
From: Douglas Anderson <dja@gendja.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 2e5239b3-b9eb-44d8-aab6-d06d96ced99f
X-Archives-Hash: ad0d4b1463b08ce0489e5fe0abf20c91

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Tiziano M=FCller <dev-zero@gentoo.org> wro=
te:
> Am Montag, den 23.02.2009, 22:25 +1300 schrieb Alistair Bush:
>>
>> Tiziano M=FCller wrote:
>> >> What is proposed in glep-55 seems to aim to solve both issues at the
>> >> same time (it isn't stated) by switching file extension every time th=
e
>> >> eapi is changed. This is slightly against the principle of the least
>> >> surprise and apparently is disliked by enough people to lead the
>> >> situation to be discussed in the council.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Instead of switching file extension every time the eapi is changed you
>> > could also increment it only when a new EAPI breaks sourcing the ebuil=
d
>> > compared to the requirements of the prior EAPI.
>> > (This way you'd in fact split EAPI into a major- and a minor-version.)
>> >
>>
>> Doesn't that just add extra complexity for no gain.
> Yes, sure. I was just looking for a solution for the "we have countless .=
eapi-X after 10 years" problem.

No one wants to be working with ebuild-29 or something like that in a
few years and trying to figure out which feature came in which EAPI.
Instead of bumping EAPI for each little change, save them up and bump
no more than once a year or less, each bump bringing in some major new
feature. With a little common sense and planning, we could make this a
non-issue and give ebuild authors and PM devs alike a little time to
get used to each change.