| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Doug Goldstein wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Bash-4 in EAPI-3 |
| 4 |
> > ---------------- |
| 5 |
> > Goal: A request has been made to allow bash-4.0 features in |
| 6 |
> > EAPI-3. Decide first whether or not to open the EAPI-3 feature |
| 7 |
> > list at all. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> No. bash-4 has seen some regressions and some oddities. 24 patches |
| 10 |
> in and its starting to seem remotely sane, except the problem is it |
| 11 |
> does not have wide scale adoption yet. I expect to see a lot of |
| 12 |
> patches coming. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I agree. It's too early for bash-4 in the tree. Also Portage would |
| 15 |
have to depend on bash-4 then. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Additionally, EAPI-3 has been an ongoing thing long enough. The more |
| 18 |
> we keep pushing this off the more items should be shuffled in. We |
| 19 |
> decided what EAPI-3 was a long time back. Stick with that. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
This is not a strong argument. The current bottleneck is the |
| 22 |
implementation of EAPI-3 features in Portage. If we reopen the feature |
| 23 |
list, but allow only things that have zero implementation cost in |
| 24 |
Portage, then it would cause no additional delay. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Ulrich |
Archives