Re: [gentoo-project] EAPI bump should require revbump

[Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>]

On 20/10/12 13:14, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
>> Hey all -- there was just a discussion in #gentoo-dev about this, so
>> following up here..
>
>> 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.
>
>> Why i'm bringing this up here, is because Chansaw and I were 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 ?
>
> So far the guideline was that a revbump isn't required if the files
> installed by the ebuild don't change, or if there are only trivial
> changes that don't affect functionality (like files going to
> /usr/share/doc).
>
> I don't see why EAPI bumps should be handled differently from other
> changes to the ebuild. If the installed files don't change, why would
> one impose upon the user to recompile the package?
>
> Ulrich
>

+1.   PM's that can't handle EAPI bump without revbump are broken in my 
eyes.

If the content doesn't change, then revbumps are *annoying waste of CPU 
cycles*

- Samuli