List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:07:23 +0200
Patrick Lauer <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 20 September 2009 13:28:40 Richard Freeman wrote:
> > Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > So, should we always keep a working EAPI 0 version around? If not, when
> > > can we drop support for old EAPIs? Your opinions please.
> > You might want to define what you mean by dropping support for old
> > EAPIs? Do you mean:
> > 1. No longer ensuring that users who have pre-EAPI versions of portage
> > have a clean upgrade path.
> > or
> > 2. No longer supporting EAPI=0/1 in package managers.
Sorry for not being more clear. I meant the former. Should we keep an EAPI
0 version of system packages around indefinitely, and if not, what can we use
as a rule of thumb to decide when it's okay to raise the required minimum.
I'm not talking about dropping EAPI 0/1/etc support altogether, either from
the tree or from PMs.
> I think he means neither. We should no longer tolerate pre-EAPI2 ebuilds being
> added to the tree and should work on migrating all "old" ebuilds as the need
No, that's a different discussion, though one that should also be had.
Personally I only bump the EAPI when I need to, but I wouldn't argue against
a policy that new ebuilds (bumps or new packages) should use EAPI 'x'.
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark.
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662