| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> EAPI 1 is entirely specified in terms of a diff against EAPI 0. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
That doesn't have a complete definition by itself. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Checking every part that's changed before releasing an EAPI 1 package |
| 7 |
> manager is the least any responsible person would do. That they would |
| 8 |
> release a version without doing such basic tests shows you just how |
| 9 |
> much they care about Gentoo... |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Again smearing without substance. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
>> Assuming that Ciaranm isn't just lying knowingly it's just plainly |
| 14 |
>> rude, otherwise it is pure malice. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> What, asking the pkgcore people to test their code before releasing a |
| 17 |
> version that claims to support EAPI 1 but actually doesn't, forcing |
| 18 |
> people to avoid using some of EAPI 1 to avoid breaking pkgcore, is |
| 19 |
> malice? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Saying that w/out giving any substance? Sure! |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> The whole "EAPI lets us do upgrades cleanly" process is broken when |
| 24 |
> people release a package manager that claims to support a certain EAPI |
| 25 |
> but doesn't. If pkgcore had any actual users we'd have to consider |
| 26 |
> banning EAPI 1 in the tree and releasing EAPI 2 as being identical to |
| 27 |
> EAPI 1 just to work around this. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Apparently those users do not see the problem, you do, help those blind |
| 30 |
people. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
lu |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Luca Barbato |
| 37 |
Gentoo Council Member |
| 38 |
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
| 39 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives