| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:49:10 +0800 |
| 3 |
> Zhang Le <r0bertz@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> As long as there is an agreement in any given point of time, it is |
| 6 |
>>>> OK. Such as, put your EAPI definition on the first line of your |
| 7 |
>>>> ebuild, like EAPI="value" |
| 8 |
>>> No good for package managers written before the agreement. |
| 9 |
>> Why not force user to upgrade their PM? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> That's a) exactly what we're trying to avoid with EAPIs, b) no good |
| 12 |
> because there isn't a sane way of forcing a package manager upgrade and |
| 13 |
> c) another one of those "wait a year until we can use anything" things. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
People have to upgrade even if we adopt the suffix approach, as like I just said. |
| 16 |
We don't actually need to force people upgrade their PM, if they need new |
| 17 |
version of software whose ebuild is in new EAPI, they will want to upgrade |
| 18 |
their PM themselves, either way. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Zhang Le, Robert |
| 22 |
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973 |
| 23 |
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973 |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives