From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F414113933E for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 13:46:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A584E0BD7; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 13:46:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFEE8E0BD7 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 13:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting 2021-07-11 - call for agenda items From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2021 15:45:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.2 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 29f53c7e-c924-4e4a-a2c0-2a67780b3331 X-Archives-Hash: f87174c7f648e89f96130aefd7c5812b On Mon, 2021-07-05 at 12:17 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 05 Jul 2021, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > The agenda is still open for additional items that the council > > should > > discuss or vote on. For agenda items, please respond to this message > > on the gentoo-project mailing list. > > Replying to my own message. :) > > Now that EAPI is supported by stable Portage (3.0.20-r6 went stable > on the last arch today), I would like to ask the council to deprecate > EAPI 6, both for ebuilds and for profiles. > > In the past, the council had also banned EAPIs. However, that didn't > make much of a practical difference because an EAPI cannot be added > to eapis-banned in layout.conf unless all ebuilds are gone. Maybe we > should have a rule like the following instead: > "A deprecated EAPI is considered banned when the Gentoo repository > no longer contains any ebuilds using it." While I understand your point, I agree with others that there is a value in having a non-technically-enforced ban, i.e. keeping the overall process as: 1) deprecate the EAPI (i.e. "please avoid using this EAPI"), 2) formally ban the EAPI (i.e. "do not use it in new ebuilds, unless you have a really good reason to"), 3) entirely ban the EAPI (i.e. technically prevent ebuilds with it). I agree that technically 2) doesn't change much but I'd prefer if we could avoid "EAPI n is only deprecated, so it's fine to still use it!" argument. -- Best regards, Michał Górny