Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Cc: ferringb@×××××.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 06:47:11
Message-Id: 20120429084727.46f38444@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5 by Brian Harring
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:13:41 -0700
Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:26:41PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > >>>>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 12:11:38 +0200 > > > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: > > >> >>>>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > >> >> > * Get a versionator replacement into the PM > > >> >> > > >> >> Given the long time it's been in limbo I doubt that this will > > >> >> be a quick feature. (But I'll be glad if you convince me of > > >> >> the opposite.) > > >> > > >> > I thought we just didn't have that because we couldn't add new > > >> > global scope functions. > > >> > > >> But can we already for EAPI 5? Wouldn't the following: > > >> > > >> EAPI=5 > > >> MY_PV=$(new_pm_version_mangler_function ${PV}) > > >> > > >> still fail for old package managers that don't implement EAPI > > >> parsing? > > > > > Didn't the Council effectively vote to ignore that problem? > > > > Yes, but after some reasonable transition period. > > <insert my ongoing "Gee, lovely fucking approach to designing a > compatibility mechanism"/> > > For EAPI5, all global scope functionality/bash version/take your pick > has to be taken off the table, and held back till EAPI6- w/ the > timeline for EAPI6 being "a reasonable transition period" after EAPI5 > has been stabled in portage.
Usually, the transition period ends when we no longer bikeshed the topic. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5 Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>