| 1 |
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:14:33PM +0100, Ch??-Thanh Christopher Nguy???n wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: |
| 3 |
> >> Is there really much of a benefit to this? I guess for anybody who |
| 4 |
> >> runs scripts to mass-manipulate ebuilds it might be helpful, but I |
| 5 |
> >> think all the package managers planned on supporting all the EAPIs for |
| 6 |
> >> quite a while longer. |
| 7 |
> > We have to support them indefinitely. It's not possible to uninstall a |
| 8 |
> > package whose EAPI is unknown. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Would it be feasible to do a pkg_pretend() check and refuse |
| 12 |
> install/upgrade if packages with unsupported EAPI are detected? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The question should be "is it worth doing it", rather than "can we |
| 15 |
hack out something". |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
As Ciaran said, PM's are going to be supporting EAPI1 indefinitely- |
| 18 |
it's zero cost to do so at this point. Thus doing what you're |
| 19 |
proposing doesn't gain us anything but complexity. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
If people want to enforce the eapi1 is no longer used in the gentoo |
| 22 |
repo, that's fine- we stick a list of acceptable EAPI's into |
| 23 |
its layout.conf. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If you want to block EAPI1 from being further used, go that route; at |
| 26 |
least for pkgcore (and presumably paludis, likely portage), ripping |
| 27 |
out EAPI1 is unlikely to occur anything this side of 2015. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
~brian |
Archives