From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mp9DW-0000dm-4o for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:19:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 637C6E0998; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:19:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.trelane.net (mail.trelane.net [66.93.203.104]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3683CE0998 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 23:19:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.trelane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE7F1865A3; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:19:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at trelane.net Received: from mail.trelane.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (master.trelane.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jtwfg3aLEfum; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:19:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.trelane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09391865A4; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:19:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.10.108] (dsl093-203-201.ind1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.203.201]) by mail.trelane.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8CA211865A3; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:19:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4AB5670D.3030901@trelane.net> Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:19:41 -0400 From: Andrew D Kirch User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Package Manager Specification discussions X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ciaran McCreesh CC: Ulrich Mueller , Patrick Lauer , gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] tree-layout.tex small cleanup References: <200909192215.41235.patrick@gentoo.org> <20090919212541.269df025@snowcone> <200909192234.39415.patrick@gentoo.org> <20090919214515.6b314a3f@snowmobile> <19125.21814.705689.833261@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20090919231135.0539253b@snowmobile> <4AB55BBA.9070908@trelane.net> <20090919233849.1d7713f3@snowmobile> In-Reply-To: <20090919233849.1d7713f3@snowmobile> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4f30d96d-961f-4ee3-9502-6919dfdd7d72 X-Archives-Hash: 0a3dbdbe92900f5377fbf38063a3e5c4 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:31:22 -0400 > Andrew D Kirch wrote: > >>> But it was an official Gentoo project, and it was used in a >>> repository run by the Gentoo KDE team. Remember that EAPI support >>> is needed to be able to uninstall a package that was installed with >>> a particular EAPI, so EAPIs can't be removed even when they're no >>> longer in use. >>> >> I can't agree here. While no process exists to remove deprecated EAPI >> functionality, this sort of thing should be noted in the NEXT EAPI >> RELEASED and via that method eliminated. >> > > Please explain what you mean. EAPIs are conceptually independent, and > don't deprecate each other in any kind of way, and future EAPI > releases can't retroactively change what previous EAPIs said. > There's no reason why a subsequent EAPI cannot modify or remove behavior created in a previous EAPI. >> This is a specifications document, not a history lesson covering past >> mistakes. >> > > Getting off-topic here, but which parts of kdebuild-1 do you think were > mistakes? Given how kdebuild-1 features are making their way into EAPIs > 2, 3 and beyond as Portage gains support for them, I'm sure you don't > mean that every feature was wrong, so which of the remaining ones do you > think shouldn't be adopted and why? > kdebuild itself wasn't a mistake, that it made it in when it's not used was.