| 1 |
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:06:17 +0100 |
| 2 |
"Justin Lecher (jlec)" <jlec@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 5 |
> Hash: SHA512 |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> On 16/11/15 10:01, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 8 |
> > On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 23:53:05 +0000 (UTC) "Michał Górny" |
| 9 |
> > <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> >> commit: ad4c142684afb096e8fff2937ae5c5c3385dd22e Author: |
| 12 |
> >> Michał Górny <mgorny <AT> gentoo <DOT> org> AuthorDate: Fri Nov |
| 13 |
> >> 13 18:46:33 2015 +0000 Commit: Michał Górny <mgorny <AT> |
| 14 |
> >> gentoo <DOT> org> CommitDate: Fri Nov 13 23:52:53 2015 +0000 |
| 15 |
> >> URL: |
| 16 |
> >> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=ad4c1426 |
| 17 |
> >> |
| 18 |
> >> autotools-{utils,multilib}.eclass: Ban for EAPI=6 |
| 19 |
> >> |
| 20 |
> >> Ban autotools-utils.eclass and dependant |
| 21 |
> >> autotools-multilib.eclass for EAPI=6 to avoid them being |
| 22 |
> >> accidentally enabled. The former eclass should be replaced with |
| 23 |
> >> inline code, the latter with multilib-minimal.eclass. |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > Not that I particularly like those eclasses, but I seem to have |
| 27 |
> > missed the deprecation warnings for these. I hope you're planning |
| 28 |
> > in submitting patches "fixing" consumers... |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Probably the developers should fix their ebuilds when they bump to |
| 31 |
> EAPI=6. While I haven't looked at the change exactly, Michał announced |
| 32 |
> it as a EAPI >= 6 Ban. So no backwards breakages expected. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Probably those that want to ban it should fix the(ir) tree so that |
| 35 |
developers have no pain in bumping to eapi6? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
While I agree we should move away from those eclasses, the "I decided |
| 38 |
to throw the crap at other developers with eapi6 without deprecation |
| 39 |
period" is a bit hard to grasp. Esp. when these eclasses were advertised |
| 40 |
as the way to go not so long ago... |
Archives