Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Eclass vs EAPI For Utility Functions (Patching/etc)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 17:03:39
Message-Id: 20140619170311.GA11784@linux1
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Eclass vs EAPI For Utility Functions (Patching/etc) by Rich Freeman
1 Hi all:
3 On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 07:00:15AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
4 > During the council meeting there was a bit of a philosophical debate
5 > over the proper role of EAPI vs implementing functions in eclasses. I
6 > felt that it was important enough to at least get more community input
7 > before we continue voting on features like user patching/etc which
8 > tend to favor an EAPI-based approach.
10 I am strongly in favor of the eapi-based approach as well, for all of
11 the reasons mentioned in the thread so far.
13 Eclasses can and should be used for functions, imo, that are used by
14 some ebuilds, but once it is determined that functionality in an eclass has
15 potential for very wide use, that functionality should be moved into an
16 eapi. The eutils functions are a prime example of this. These are
17 general purpose functions, so there is no reason for them to be kept in
18 an eclass.
20 William


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature