>>>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote:

>> Stable Portage supports EAPI 6 since 2016-01-17, i.e. since 26
>> months. So we would be somewhat on the early side.

> Not that it's less than the supported upgrade path.

Yes, I don't think that we have a problem there. Just noting that's
it would be sooner than for all previous EAPIs.

>> What worries me more is that deprecation of EAPI 5 would apply to
>> profiles too. However, all profiles are still at EAPI 5 at this
>> point, and I don't see any value in upgrading them to EAPI 6.

> That's a fair argument. However:

> 1. Does deprecation really mean anything in terms of profiles? Even
> in the context of EAPI bans we explicitly stated that it affects new
> packages and EAPI bumps. I think deprecating it for ebuilds is still
> meaningful even if profiles would stay EAPI 5.

OK, but then we should clearly state this.

> 2. Do we want to keep profiles EAPI 5 indefinitely? If we consider
> it a goal to reduce the number of EAPIs in use, I think it would be
> reasonable to bump profiles to EAPI 6 proactively, even if it
> doesn't change anything.

The only effect this has is that it can impede some users' upgrade
path. Or is there any feature in EAPI 6 that is needed in profiles?

Another way to keep the number of EAPIs limited would be to skip
EAPI 6 for profiles. We have done that for EAPIs 3 and 4 previously
(i.e., all previous and current profiles were EAPI 0, 1, 2, or 5).

Ulrich