On 24-10-2009 22:37:30 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > The suggestion was to just introduce EAPI=3 with these variables, and
> > making everything which is scheduled for current EAPI=3 just EAPI=4.  I
> > was told we could quite quickly have a Portage in the tree that would
> > set ED and EROOT for EAPI=3 that way.
> 
> Maybe 2+prefix is a more describing name? This would avoid changing what
> EAPI 3 means.

Naming is up to others, from my point of view.

> > Are there any objections to this?  If not, I'd like to put this on the
> > agenda for the next council meeting.
> 
> As the council decided to add new stuff in the last meeting if zac is
> starting to implement new EAPIs this could go into EAPI 3 too.

Yes, this was implicit, the next EAPI should contain the same support
too.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level