| 1 |
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> As a possibly relevant side note, I've observed how api changes are handled |
| 3 |
> in the linux kernel: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> You can change whatever you want if it's a good idea, but as part of proving |
| 6 |
> it, you have to be willing to take over the warranty for anything you break. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> So basically you change what you please ONLY if you also take the burden of |
| 9 |
> fixing everything that depended on what you screwed with. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Is this how things are handled by gentoo as well? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
For the most part, yes, though sometimes changes are posted well in |
| 15 |
advance with the goal of getting everybody to pitch in. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This is why a change like this was implemented with an EAPI change. |
| 18 |
There is no retroactive impact of the change, so nothing in the tree |
| 19 |
is affected. Developers just have to fix their ebuilds before they |
| 20 |
move to the new EAPI. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Rich |
Archives