Archives
Archives
| From: | Ferris McCormick <fmccor@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) | ||
| Date: | Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:55:13 | ||
| Message-Id: | 1235483708.23500.60.camel@liasis.inforead.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) by Ciaran McCreesh |
||
| 1 | On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 22:19 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 | > On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:15:25 -0600 |
| 3 | > Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 | > > Can we ban eclasses from setting EAPI? Is there any case where it |
| 5 | > > would be sane? |
| 6 | > |
| 7 | > It's already banned from a QA perspective, but from a package manager |
| 8 | > perspective people have done it in the past and possibly still do do |
| 9 | > it, and the spec doesn't forbid it. |
| 10 | > |
| 11 | |
| 12 | For what it's worth, no eclass in the gentoo-x86/eclass tree sets EAPI. |
| 13 | I don't know about anyplace else. |
| 14 | |
| 15 | Regards, |
| 16 | Ferris |
| 17 | -- |
| 18 | Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o> |
| 19 | Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Userrel, Trustees) |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) | Serkan Kaba <serkan@g.o> |