On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:30:14 -0500
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:

> > Realistically I assume you're taking the stance "EAPI gets in the
> > way, lets do away with it"- if so, well, out with it, and I'll
> > dredge up the old logs/complaints that lead to EAPI.
> 
> I see EAPI as a nice thing for standardizing features that are 
> implemented in the PM so they work identically across portage,
> pkgcore, and paludis. But I don't think that implementing things in
> the PM when they could go in an eclass is automatically the best
> choice. It dramatically slows down the speed of iteration,
> prototyping, and bug fixing.

What is more important is that it takes the code further from devs.
I like to see the code I use, and be able to do anything about it if
necessary. Not to see a spec and three different implementation, of
which two use random hacks which I can't do anything about unless I
start to implement PM-specific anti-hacks in my code.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny