| 1 |
On 06/09/16 14:35, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09/06/2016 03:19 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> I believe you're overthinking it, if we make it a guideline to include a |
| 5 |
>>> section of the eclass (as many already have) that does e.g (take this |
| 6 |
>>> for example purposes) there is no EAPI/PMS change needed |
| 7 |
>>> case "${EAPI:-0}" in |
| 8 |
>>> 4|5|6) |
| 9 |
>>> ;; |
| 10 |
>>> *) die "EAPI=${EAPI} is not supported" ;; |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> I think the question becomes then what do we do about eclasses that |
| 13 |
>> don't follow the guideline? |
| 14 |
> A natural step might be QA team involved in such cases? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
Did you just volunteer to join QA there, Kristian ?! ;) |
Archives