1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> I think we do need to be careful about not creating barriers to |
4 |
> maintenance like this. If people are given the choice of doing a lot |
5 |
> of work to make a small improvement vs not doing an improvement at |
6 |
> all, they'll often pick the latter. |
7 |
|
8 |
> We definitely want to phase out the old EAPIs, but changes to |
9 |
> existing ebuilds shouldn't require bringing them fully up-to-date. |
10 |
> It should be done if it makes sense, however (at the discretion of |
11 |
> the person doing the work). |
12 |
|
13 |
If changing ebuilds to a banned EAPI is allowed, then we can as well |
14 |
lift the ban altogether: I could create a new ebuild under some |
15 |
allowed EAPI, then change it to a banned one, and it would still be |
16 |
within the rules. |
17 |
|
18 |
That's not what I would call a consistent policy. In this case, we |
19 |
should better revert our decision from February. |
20 |
|
21 |
Ulrich |