1 |
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:23:55 -0800 |
2 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:02:15 +0100 |
5 |
> Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 |
8 |
> > Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > > What do you think? |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > +1 |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > even if I sometimes use those cmake-utils_use*, they tend to confuse |
16 |
> > me and find -DABCD=$(usex ...) much easier to understand for the |
17 |
> > occasional user of cmake-utils.eclass. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought EAPI 6 specifications were |
22 |
> finalized. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Doesn't that mean this will have to wait for EAPI 7? |
25 |
|
26 |
It's eclass API, so it's free to change anytime. Using a new EAPI to |
27 |
change eclass API has the benefit that you can ban new uses of |
28 |
deprecated functions without breaking existing ebuilds. |
29 |
|
30 |
-- |
31 |
Best regards, |
32 |
Michał Górny |
33 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |