1 |
>>>>> On Wed, 09 Feb 2022, Sam James wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2022 08:18:07 +0100 |
4 |
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
>> There is no special time period for making such proposals; future EAPI |
7 |
>> bugs can be filed at any time. Preferably, they should be filed early, |
8 |
>> because we've had very bad experience with including last-minute |
9 |
>> features. |
10 |
|
11 |
> Agreed on the latter point, but this doesn't mean a simple courtesy |
12 |
> notice would be problematic. |
13 |
|
14 |
> Not everyone will be aware EAPI 9 is in the works; in particular, it's |
15 |
> useful for our downstreams to know and possibly suggest any improvements |
16 |
> given they're not likely to be as aware of day-to-day developments in |
17 |
> Gentoo, and it's useful as a final poke to notify people that if indeed |
18 |
> they feel something should be in the next EAPI (or "soon"), they should |
19 |
> file a bug and so on. |
20 |
|
21 |
> I am not saying any such requests must be accepted for EAPI 9. But |
22 |
> engaging with the community with a notice isn't a bad thing? |
23 |
|
24 |
> Someone could easily think the next EAPI is years away and therefore |
25 |
> feel no urgency to flesh out their (possibly very simple) idea or |
26 |
> improvement. |
27 |
|
28 |
*shrug* The item is in the Council meeting agenda which is sent to the |
29 |
gentoo-dev-announce mailing list, so people should be aware? |
30 |
|
31 |
Anyway, I am cross-posting this to -dev and I include my original |
32 |
message [0] below. (Sorry for the noise; I still think this is sort of |
33 |
redundant.) |
34 |
|
35 |
Ulrich |
36 |
|
37 |
[0] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/7d63f1d8d52e876a9fa8374d816e7e7f |
38 |
|
39 |
| As I had announced in the January meeting, I'd ask the Council to |
40 |
| pre-approve the list of features for EAPI 9, as listed here: |
41 |
| |
42 |
| https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Future_EAPI/EAPI_9_tentative_features |
43 |
| |
44 |
| - Eclass revisions [1] |
45 |
| - EAPI of profiles defaults to repository EAPI [2] |
46 |
| - Allow comments in profile parent files [3] |
47 |
| - econf: Ensure proper end of string in configure --help output [4] |
48 |
| |
49 |
| This will be an EAPI with few new features, and its motivation is mainly |
50 |
| to have eclass revisions. The second and third feature will affect only |
51 |
| profiles, and the fourth feature is effectively a bug fix. |
52 |
| |
53 |
| There were also ideas about no longer exporting A (or alternatively, any |
54 |
| variables) to the ebuild environment [5], but nobody has come forward |
55 |
| with a concrete proposal yet. So, IMHO it will need more discussion and |
56 |
| won't be ready for EAPI 9; developers who have asked for the feature may |
57 |
| consider leading that discussion. IIUC, these would be the TeX and Go |
58 |
| maintainers. |
59 |
| |
60 |
| [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/806592 |
61 |
| [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/806181 |
62 |
| [3] https://bugs.gentoo.org/470094 |
63 |
| [4] https://bugs.gentoo.org/815169 |
64 |
| [5] https://bugs.gentoo.org/721088 |