Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: gentoo-council <gentoo-council@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 03:14:03
Message-Id: 4C427152.2090707@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-council] Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC by Brian Harring
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17-07-2010 23:33, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 01:05:02AM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote: >> The Council will have its next meeting on the 26th of July, 2010. >> >> The meeting will begin at 1900 UTC. >> >> You may use [0] to find out the correct time in your timezone. >> >> Here's a draft list of the meeting topics so far: >> * vote on adding --as-needed to the default profile's LDFLAGS >> * discuss (and maybe vote on) required-use >> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/required-use.html > > Adding eclass removal policy to the agenda; it directly affects devs, > and the previous policy (imo) is misinterpretted slightly. > > Specifically, 06/01/08, portage 2.1.4.4 went stable; this had env > saving/restoration support. The original council decree was that > eclasses had to sit for 2 years- I very strongly posit that the time > period there should've been bound to portage env capabilities rather > than eclass timelines. > > Reasoning is simple enough- w/ a proper PM, eclasses can be > removed/modified at will without affecting binpkgs/installed pkgs. > > So the question I'd like on the agenda is basically if there is any > reason to preserve the decree- if not, punt it.
I would like to have the council discuss this issue again. We should probably also address the issue of EAPI changes in eclasses that was subject of a recent thread in the dev ml.
> ~harring
Let's add to the agenda the use of the invalid DEPEND atom "EAPI_TOO_OLD" instead of calling die in global scope on eclasses. I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. Which ML do we want to use? - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMQnFRAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPpFwP/2gvNqk4RIektsFEjJZ7NhIf OcOSgBVMHFyXv7CDVP0e39bdajcH0ll2pGHYRTSHbPN0SBUN56UguRrDnlUWTjCc DMAEd9Z4xkFh07BTiDiZI1w6tm0rkjxUV3NWpKQShAxJwDNXL6j5Qvdzy/ZJPFbB TZYWRRNLBJ5fbHyCHqp5yELbflETgO148o1INyPKBB2NtmdWGHXjPUZMLQOLV9Gg eE9btQ9EU2Xi8e9bqacThEoy1UuRoG4WXn3qpgpRLSZ9H84mAKJohFKCSyntgvgU J1AldKMRTbhB+CQZ+AUG6bCIG2mtFxiL5BtapUmRUo0P/jMtt+NXQ1WL5O8vOV7t J/tUz8C/kRx/I/IIQlYOv24ZgemC5waSlYOWFN8+f1gKou0Yent/GMb0QlIMrtrU 2Xx0OrbAT1JuNCobo3D9iDJsRAtOgUbg8JziUxidNwlpQqz9mgXcL7wHtBSqoYXX UDVYyoSZwv2xEZjdr1dUMe3oDHnawbnrPW4I4o7jkPgKoszd3T1pwR83lzWHb42m u5/YnSBtKP5dfGCEcAwVPgpG8xzYx3wcfI60tuDFxBIl8gAHrFgnDQgS3MDt+qPe Cu9Nr4hrbmBfLzwcqNbk8QiGbjUzBG2jtrWASD6QAhDhF+pow6d3nPWXPivnUJAz drTCQgdwR21TIg8LGfrY =N+f/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies