| 1 |
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 08:58:07PM -0400, James Cloos wrote: |
| 2 |
> >>>>> "TW" == Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> TW> Also, please just call it git-3.eclass as it is a major change; any |
| 5 |
> TW> other form of naming will introduce confusion (eg. -r1 < -2), also we |
| 6 |
> TW> probably shouldn't change git-2.eclass as even when masked it doesn't |
| 7 |
> TW> seem like a good thing to break its current API and documentation as |
| 8 |
> TW> well as what actually works in the Portage tree. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> +1 on all of that. git-3 is a better name than using -r1. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> And leave git-2 there for at /least/ a year. There are a LOT of out of |
| 13 |
> tree git-2 users. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The last time I checked, out of tree eclass users are not a concern for |
| 16 |
how long we keep old eclasses in the tree. We only keep them until we |
| 17 |
are sure there are no in tree users. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Thanks, |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
William |
Archives