| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:32:27PM +0100, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Dne 25.1.2011 13:25, Markos Chandras napsal(a): |
| 6 |
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:13:06PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: |
| 7 |
> >> How about creating a project (possibly a subproject of QA or something |
| 8 |
> >> else) that would help people do that? In case of no response from |
| 9 |
> >> maintainers just do your job, and that should get the tree converted |
| 10 |
> >> more quickly than setting a policy. |
| 11 |
> > Please don't! QA is way too understaffed. We ain't gonna convert any |
| 12 |
> > ebuilds. This has nothing to do with QA. Let maintainers handle this |
| 13 |
> Pavel does not ask for us to migrate the ebuilds, but the eclasses, wich |
| 14 |
> we do anyway now :) |
| 15 |
Then I am sorry |
| 16 |
> >> |
| 17 |
> >> My main point is that said "X should be Y" does not automatically make |
| 18 |
> >> it so. We'd have to think about the migration plan anyway. |
| 19 |
> >> |
| 20 |
> >> Paweł |
| 21 |
> >> |
| 22 |
> > @Tomas, I don't follow. You mean migrate existing ebuilds or use the |
| 23 |
> > latest EAPI from now on? |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> God no, when you do bump you use new eapi :) not retroactively revert |
| 26 |
> all ebuilds to latest. |
| 27 |
Ok that works for me. As Alex said, maybe a repoman warning would be a |
| 28 |
good start |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 32 |
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) |
| 33 |
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> iEYEARECAAYFAk0+wtoACgkQHB6c3gNBRYe0lACeI/ir1DEcoxIpL/l0TEjDr5IZ |
| 36 |
> smQAn2ydpf013aaqR94t7A6MYb7nkslF |
| 37 |
> =j9iM |
| 38 |
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Markos Chandras (hwoarang) |
| 43 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 44 |
Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
| 45 |
Key FP: 660A 0742 84EC 26F1 9EDB F00A FA83 5A15 B4AF F2C2 |
Archives