1 |
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Alex Alexander wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> please have a look at the attached patch. |
5 |
> |
6 |
>> -EAPI="1" |
7 |
>> +EAPI="4" |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Shouldn't the ebuild's phase functions be updated from "EAPI 0 style" |
10 |
> to "EAPI 2 style" too? |
11 |
|
12 |
If the goal is to get this stable in a week, and bypass the 1 month |
13 |
waiting period, do we really want to change EAPI at this point? From |
14 |
an end-user perspective updating the EAPI on the ebuild provides no |
15 |
benefit. Why not just deal with that in a future revision? |
16 |
|
17 |
I don't see much value in rewriting the ebuild to use a new EAPI |
18 |
simply because 4 > 1. |
19 |
|
20 |
Rich |