Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI and system packages

[Patrick Lauer]

On Sunday 20 September 2009 13:28:40 Richard Freeman wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > So, should we always keep a working EAPI 0 version around?  If not, when
> > can we drop support for old EAPIs?  Your opinions please.
>
> You might want to define what you mean by dropping support for old
> EAPIs?  Do you mean:
>
> 1.  No longer ensuring that users who have pre-EAPI versions of portage
> have a clean upgrade path.
>
> or
>
> 2.  No longer supporting EAPI=0/1 in package managers.

I think he means neither. We should no longer tolerate pre-EAPI2 ebuilds being 
added to the tree and should work on migrating all "old" ebuilds as the need 
arises.

Having 3+x EAPIs around (depending on how you count you can end up with 
twelve) makes things confusing for devs and introduces an unneeded source for 
accidental errors.

> If we want to drop support for EAPI=0/1 then EVERY package in portage
> needs to be updated to a more recent EAPI.  I suspect we're not there
> yet (at the very least all those system packages that are deliberately
> held back need to change).
It doesn't have to be a forced process. Just prevent "old" EAPIs from being 
actively used, that'll pull up most packages to a newish EAPI soon. The rest 
is undermaintained anyway, so if anyone feels bored he can migrate them.
 
> I can see why package managers would benefit from fewer cases to
> support, however...
I think we should care more about developers and the tools they have instead 
of package manager developers and the things they may or may not do. 

At the same time I consider the current development of having EAPI 3 mostly 
finished, features for EAPI 4 discussed and ideas for EAPI 5 being thrown 
around to be quite stupid. The whole process needs to slow down. Most devs 
can't list you the differences between 0, 1 and 2 ... how do you expect them 
to have any benefit from adding more stuff?

Just my 3 cents (inflation-corrected),

Patrick