From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2159-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 CA2EA138010
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Oct 2012 12:02:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A318C21C008
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Oct 2012 12:02:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA58E030B
	for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri,  5 Oct 2012 10:31:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-bk0-f53.google.com with SMTP id jg15so793172bkc.40
        for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 03:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=ygIOb3hGMInoDireKVbeUyA0B/ubRS8njNyZZrKvOL8=;
        b=XXW6rfrrERQwXjaeB4PUxPGEpp0CCPSwfMOleFKjmozv5HiQabXaxH5+qBDqdalRDA
         qIBdY+V+xdqnY3ew8zvYOcKAw7knxXUJjPCbbJ7X6vY3BmPE6h6U7O0iKbJbHnzUAqyJ
         8AhcCo1ZWGlK8Teun7F4peWs3Cu0TtTBNsC/+0at4INCpwPGDpMR0FLBMRbD7xBJcQtn
         CvAFsR/IA0SROV8OgIG0HPigl/DRbHMe5DHsZwXdZ7Dikr3aDm84ytqMx/j2JaW1poqE
         voZEQZ8uZBWxfTepjCwJuOZ+jdbtjAYBSVrzGupWEGrWFwUUZX1m1Dux57oqPm/6jLsy
         O0tw==
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
Received: by 10.204.149.2 with SMTP id r2mr2652976bkv.0.1349433084233; Fri, 05
 Oct 2012 03:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.204.156.147 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 03:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20590.40556.939437.204618@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
References: <20120925092414.GL37574@gentoo.org>
	<1348601570.3603.4.camel@belkin4>
	<20121002113020.GZ37574@gentoo.org>
	<1349284689.2200.50.camel@belkin4>
	<1349375561.2200.57.camel@belkin4>
	<20121005062851.GI912@gentoo.org>
	<506E8197.8060504@gentoo.org>
	<20590.40556.939437.204618@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 06:31:24 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7O2rF8ec6CMy4RdsQws-PDIQ7dw
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_mz9he7miCatepBR0oaf7Up-qM84QEUKEWfjWWeDGzirQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 09-10-2012
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 799e32e9-183c-4b3c-8a74-380be1fbbb4d
X-Archives-Hash: 2660d51a6d46294ed96d65f0269090a8

On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I don't see any advantage in deprecating intermediate EAPIs, before we
> deprecate EAPI 0. What problem are you trying to solve?
>

++

I'm all for a policy that says to use slot deps whenever appropriate,
or to otherwise do things that actually have a real impact on the
quality/functionality of the distro.  That might in practice mean
using newer EAPIs on a lot of stuff.  However, I don't see the value
in bumping for its own sake.

Legislate outcomes, not details.

Rich