| 1 |
Tiziano Müller wrote: |
| 2 |
> As you can see currently, most time is needed to implemente the features |
| 3 |
> in portage. It therefore doesn't make sense to make the EAPI process |
| 4 |
> even faster. On the other hand, I think it would make sense to have a |
| 5 |
> separate group developing new EAPIs instead of the council. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Cheers, |
| 8 |
> Tiziano |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I agree with what's being said here. The previous council ran into a |
| 11 |
huge road block with EAPI and GLEP's. I think that EAPI's should be |
| 12 |
moved to the Portage herd, and GLEPs assigned as necessary until final |
| 13 |
approval or dissent is given by the council. This would hopefully |
| 14 |
reduce contention with GLEP's as has happened in the past, and put |
| 15 |
EAPI's closer to the devs who will implement them. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Andrew D Kirch |
| 18 |
Funtoo.org |
Archives