| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@×××××××××××××.uk> posted |
| 2 |
20071219000653.401ba9ba@×××××××××××××.uk, excerpted below, on Wed, 19 Dec |
| 3 |
2007 00:06:53 +0000: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> And if a particular ebuild uses features from a non-conflicting |
| 6 |
>> super-set of several such EAPIs (Ulrich's message) ... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Then there should be an EAPI defined that permits all of those features. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Functionality would only be removed from EAPIs for specific reasons: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> * Conflicts with new features (think *DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES). In which |
| 13 |
> case, you can't mix features between EAPIs anyway. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> * Deprecating old nasty features. In which case, you shouldn't be using |
| 16 |
> said features anyway. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> * Massively different EAPIs. In which case you reaaaallly can't mix |
| 19 |
> EAPIs. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I thought it worthwhile when I saw the question asked, but given your |
| 22 |
experience in the matter and the lack of anyone from the other PMs saying |
| 23 |
otherwise, I'll take your word for it. Thanks. (Of course I can't/don't |
| 24 |
speak for the original question poster.) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
(BTW, saw the http://obsethryl.eu interview. While I'm probably part of |
| 27 |
the "noise", someone with the demonstrated tenacity to follow thru as you |
| 28 |
do... every comment gets a reply... that deserves and gets a lot of |
| 29 |
respect, in my book. Thanks /for/ that follow-thru.) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 33 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 34 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives