| 1 |
Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> posted 44B7FD7A.6010209@g.o, |
| 3 |
> excerpted below, on Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:24:26 -0700: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>> Per-package use.mask is not here for another year and in the mean time I |
| 6 |
>>> needed a working solution, this is it. |
| 7 |
>> It think we can have it sooner than "another year". There are lots of |
| 8 |
>> fixes in 2.1.1_pre and I'd like to close the merge window pretty soon so |
| 9 |
>> that it can be stabilized. I'll work on a patch for package.use and |
| 10 |
>> package.use.mask so that we should be able to have it in a stable 2.1.1 |
| 11 |
>> release within a month or two. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> PMFJI but don't we have to keep compatibility with old versions for a year |
| 14 |
> (well, from my read, I believe the precedent is 10 months) after the change |
| 15 |
> hits stable, or did the discussion I remember reading a bit of decide say |
| 16 |
> 6 months was enough? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Even if EAPI is used, previous policy would have put it nearly a year from |
| 19 |
> now, as EAPI was only introduced with 2.1.0, or was it backported? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I've seen discussion of both points above, but no definitive policy |
| 22 |
> changes. If I've missed the decisions, others may have as well, so |
| 23 |
> maybe others will find the answers helpful too. |
| 24 |
EAPI support was in for the 2.0.X version of portage, released on Dec. |
| 25 |
1st 2005. Generally we wait 6 months (one release cycle) for new features. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives