| 1 |
Zac Medico wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ryan Hill wrote: |
| 3 |
>> SLOT depends are something we could really use right now. What kind of |
| 4 |
>> time frame are you thinking of? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Trying to include things that aren't implemented or things that are |
| 7 |
> controversial will delay it. It's difficult to make time estimates |
| 8 |
> for anything that's not implemented yet. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> It's trivial to do the EAPI-1 bump if we only include things that |
| 11 |
> are already implemented. I can have a sys-apps/portage release in |
| 12 |
> the tree this week with EAPI-1 support if we choose to do that. |
| 13 |
> Looking at bug #174380, I'd say that EAPI-1 should certainly include |
| 14 |
> #174405, #174410, and #179380 since they're all implemented and |
| 15 |
> relatively non-controversial. Anything more than those can lead to |
| 16 |
> potential delays. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes please. ;P I think doing small incremental bumps would be better |
| 19 |
than trying to stuff everything in at once. Doing it now would also |
| 20 |
give us a sense of what to expect in future, more invasive EAPI changes. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
fonts / wxWindows / gcc-porting / treecleaners |
| 24 |
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives