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 ) 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 ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id f25so1954388rvb.46 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:11:09 -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 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: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) From: Douglas Anderson 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 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.