| 1 |
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:10:29 -0600 |
| 2 |
Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> I think the spec should just be upgraded because it isn't exactly |
| 4 |
> obvious to the casual dev what is a 3.0 feature vs 3.1, etc. We |
| 5 |
> already have 3.1 features in the tree, I'm not sure where the red |
| 6 |
> tape is here. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The problem is, if the tree uses 3.1 and you don't have 3.1, it's a |
| 9 |
massive pain in the ass to upgrade. We waited a loooong time between |
| 10 |
3.0 going stable and allowing it in the tree because of that. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Ideally we'd say "no using 3.1 features unless EAPI=3", but that would |
| 13 |
be messy with eclasses even if developers did know that += is a 3.1 |
| 14 |
feature... |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives