On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 11:25:03 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote:

> Items proposed but not on the agenda:
> 
>  * Optional runtime dependencies [5]
>    - What is the decision to be made? If none, it's not on the agenda

The decision is on how to proceed:
a) do not do anything at all (i.e. either mention deps in
   pkg_postinst(), use plain USE or whatever devs like now),
b) introduce some kind of SDEPEND in a new EAPI [1],
c) re-use USE flags and allow declaring some of them as runtime-only
   (so they won't require package rebuilds and just adjust @world
   depgraph) [2 mostly, though not necessarily using USE_EXPAND].

> If you have anything you'd like to push to the council for
> discussion, feel free to reply to this thread.

I'd like the Council to put some point on the topic of changing eclass
APIs heavily with EAPI bumps [3].

[1]:http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_da5d388d76d705f36f7ab6bde5c81855.xml
[2]:http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_54631ad0f36e5a71b3af3efde1916149.xml
[3]:http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_46216a320765c5e966f54dbd12029a51.xml

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny