1 |
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:43:00 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> >>>>> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010, Petteri Räty wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> >> I think removal of functions is a special case of "Adding and |
7 |
> >> Updating Eclasses" and we already have a policy for this. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> > Removing functions needs a migration plan. For example how long to |
10 |
> > have a warning there, how long before it can be removed etc. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> There may be no general answer to these questions. If it's an eclass |
13 |
> with limited scope and if the functions are no longer used in the |
14 |
> tree, then I don't see the need for a long transition period. OTOH, |
15 |
> for widespread eclasses like eutils you'd probably want it. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> > I don't see how you can get those from the common policy? |
18 |
> |
19 |
> "If you don't email gentoo-dev first, and end up breaking something, |
20 |
> expect to be in a lot of trouble." |
21 |
|
22 |
Now that's a policy I can get behind. :) |
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
fonts, by design, by neglect |
27 |
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect |
28 |
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |