From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2175-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080F0138010
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:02:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C0D1621C09B
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:02:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smarthost03.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost03.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.3])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F00D21C032
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:51:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [62.3.120.142] (helo=NeddySeagoon)
	by smarthost03.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org>)
	id 1TPg0f-0001qF-PX
	for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:51:05 +0000
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:51:05 +0100
From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] EAPI bump should require revbump
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <50815B0B.7060705@gentoo.org> (from axs@gentoo.org on Fri Oct
	19 14:52:11 2012)
X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.12
Message-Id: <1350766265.2900.1@NeddySeagoon>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-Smarthost03-IP: [62.3.120.142]
X-Archives-Salt: c8524314-b6f5-401e-ac04-c79a7b48e247
X-Archives-Hash: 73e1b90a4e7355f2338d03360f61530c

On 2012.10.19 14:52, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> Hey all -- there was just a discussion in #gentoo-dev about this, so
> following up here..
>=20
> Due to the fact that an EAPI-bump can imply different behaviour from
> eclasses or the PM, an EAPI-bump should in most cases also require an
> ebuild revbump.
>=20
> Why i'm bringing this up here, is because Chansaw and I were=20
> wondering
> if common sense will not be enough to ensure this and it should be
> made a policy to revbump when migrating to a new EAPI ?
>=20
>=20

Common sense is much rarer than you might expect.
It should be explicit.

--=20
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees
=