Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE and deprecation of check_license

[Zac Medico]

On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
>>>> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
>>>> avoid using PROPERTIES=interactive in cases when it is due to
>>>> check_license alone, since anything with a license in the @EULA
>>>> license group is automatically masked by the default
>>>> ACCEPT_LICENSE="* -@EULA" portage configuration [2].
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299095
>>>> [2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=302645
>>>
>>> We could handle it like deprecating ebeep and epause. With EAPI=4 don't
>>> define the function any more and the Portage version will be
>>> sufficiently new to have ACCEPT_LICENSE.
>>
>> That's a good idea. However, we may want to deprecate check_license
>> it starting with EAPI=3 since the corresponding portage versions
>> already support ACCEPT_LICENSE.
>
> Likely there wouldn't be any breakage with it doing it in EAPI 3 but it
> would be against the eclass contract of not changing expected behavior.

Given that check_license already returns silently if the user has
accepted the appropriate license(s) via ACCEPT_LICENSE, it's not
necessary to change the eclass contract in order to safely remove
PROPERTIES=interactive from EAPI=3 ebuilds.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac