| 1 |
On 12/31/10 12:13 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
> EAPI 0 might stick around for quite a while but for example deprecating |
| 3 |
> EAPI 1 shouldn't be as hard. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
That seems also to be a safe first step. EAPI-1 ebuilds were at least |
| 6 |
written with EAPIs in mind. That's obviously not true for EAPI-0. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
We could even deprecate EAPI-2 in favor of EAPI-3, hmmm.... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I think a repoman non-fatal warning would be fine. If we have a warning |
| 11 |
about forcing -j1, we can surely have one about ancient EAPIs. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
P.S. I'm excited to see the progress with PMS and new EAPIs being more |
| 16 |
and more convenient and addressing frequent annoyances or deficiencies! |
Archives