| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 03/03/14 02:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> Dnia 2014-03-03, o godz. 12:14:13 Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> |
| 6 |
> napisał(a): |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
>>>>>>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Anthony G Basile wrote: |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>>> I'm putting the call out there for any agenda items for the |
| 11 |
>>> next Council meeting, which will be held on March 11, 2014 at |
| 12 |
>>> 1900 UTC. This is short notice but we got off track because of |
| 13 |
>>> FOSDEM and we're going to try to get back on track. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> In February we have voted to "ban new EAPI 1 and 2 ebuilds". Now |
| 16 |
>> I've seen some commits where ebuilds were changed in place from |
| 17 |
>> EAPI 0 to EAPI 1. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Can we clarify that the ban includes updating the EAPI in |
| 20 |
>> existing ebuilds? |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> So how we are supposed to handle updating rev-deps to use proper |
| 23 |
> slot? Convert ancient versions to a new EAPI or just drop them |
| 24 |
> completely? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That's up to you, as maintainer, isn't it? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 30 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlMU4HgACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAVOgEAk+b6FA2990/5Z1zzxmSYSXWF |
| 33 |
N6OM6hHFlSRU9YJHFIoA+wS+mlB8HC+suUknx3+mQze7SM2GMxfqIJaUjSyHiud+ |
| 34 |
=StYV |
| 35 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives