>>>>> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Michał Górny wrote:

> [...] IUSE_RUNTIME [...]

> Another thing is implementing it. But if it's deferred right now,
> I doubt it's going to move on until the last vote. Zac used to be
> pretty positive about it but nobody started trying to implement it.

I'd rather avoid adding a feature to EAPI 6 where we don't have a
proof of concept at least.

We made this mistake in EAPI 3 and it was endlessly delayed. (What was
originally intended to be EAPI 3 is now called EAPI 4, and at least
one of its features was further delayed until EAPI 5.)

> I'd say the initial vote may happen on the idea now, and if
> necessary, the implementation may be postponed into next EAPI later.

We can vote and give the go-ahead for it, and if IUSE_RUNTIME is
ready in time, then it can be part of EAPI 6. But please, let's keep
it separate from the EAPI, for the time being.

Ulrich