| 1 |
On 12/31/2010 01:02 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> after approval of EAPI 4, there are now 5 different EAPIs available, |
| 5 |
> and it's hard to remember what features are offered by which EAPI. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> So maybe it's about time that we deprecate EAPIs 0 and 1 for new |
| 8 |
> ebuilds. As a first step, a warning could be added to repoman that |
| 9 |
> would be triggered whenever a new ebuild with an EAPI less than 2 is |
| 10 |
> committed. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
First we need to be sure that all relevant eclasses support upgrading to |
| 14 |
EAPI 2. As plenty of ebuilds are still in EAPI 0 it's likely that some |
| 15 |
eclasses are too. But I do second the idea of trying to limit the set of |
| 16 |
active EAPIs in the tree. Please open a repoman bug if there are no |
| 17 |
objections. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> At a later time, the warning could be changed to an error. When most |
| 20 |
> of the tree has been updated to EAPI 2 or newer, we could also think |
| 21 |
> about actively converting the remaining ebuilds. (Currently this |
| 22 |
> doesn't look feasible though, as about half of the tree is still at |
| 23 |
> EAPI=0. [1]) |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
EAPI 0 might stick around for quite a while but for example deprecating |
| 27 |
EAPI 1 shouldn't be as hard. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Regards, |
| 30 |
Petteri |
Archives