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
James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>> "Petteri" == Petteri Räty <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Petteri> Their maintainers should be active and switch their ebuilds to
> Petteri> EAPI 2. If they don't have an active maintainer, then do we
> Petteri> want to keep live ebuilds for them around?
> What possible benefit could be had from dropping ebuilds for no other
> reason than their EAPI?
The goal is to eventually get rid of built_with_use.
> Your initial post indicated that you only wanted to drop ebuilds which
> were unlikely to be in use by users. Given the fact that most (all?)
> live ebuilds are masked, any automated tests for the likelyhood that
> an ebuild is in active use will, by definition, have false negatives
> when dealing with live ebuilds. (Where false negative means unlikely
> to be in use even though it, in fact, is in use.)
If you read the code I attached you will see that the reason live
ebuilds show up in there is because adjutrix -U puts them to the list
because they don't have any keywords. It follows my original reasoning
that for live ebuilds the solution is to migrate them to EAPI 2.