From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2817-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 E6B861381F3
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 20:15:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 660CEE0A5C;
	Fri,  5 Jul 2013 20:15:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from gold.linx.net (gold.linx.net [195.66.232.40])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B962FE0A5A
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 20:14:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by gold.linx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4281A102E3
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 21:14:58 +0100 (BST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at linx.net
Received: from gold.linx.net ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (gold.linx.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026)
	with ESMTP id zQV78zE706-m for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>;
	Fri,  5 Jul 2013 21:14:58 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a01:40:21:2:5e9a:d8ff:fee0:64e9] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:40:21:2:5e9a:d8ff:fee0:64e9])
	(using SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: tony@linx.net)
	by gold.linx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C7D4B102E0
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Jul 2013 21:14:57 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <1373055304.7405.35.camel@adrastea>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Questions for candidates for Gentoo
 Council 2013/2014
From: Tony Vroon <chainsaw@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 21:15:04 +0100
In-Reply-To: <51D722BC.10207@gentoo.org>
References: <201307012054.06728.Arfrever.FTA@gmail.com>
	 <51D2CB89.9050402@opensource.dyc.edu>
	 <20130702234246.05507806@caribou.gateway.2wire.net>
	 <51D722BC.10207@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4 
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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: aa2dca0f-2e03-4593-a89c-549a5fef7f35
X-Archives-Hash: 056e74180a040f184106b07635d02105

On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 15:47 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> I would be forever in your debt if toolchain were on eapi 5 and had
> proper subslot deps.

It certainly sounds like a much better approach to incrementally improve
the toolchain eclass rather than trying to forcibly invalidate EAPI 0
through a council decree.
Once the actual use tapers off to where a removal makes sense... we may
still end up on a tree with minimum EAPI 5 this year. 

Regards,
Tony V.