| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 30/08/12 08:37 AM, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Johannes Huber <johu@g.o> |
| 6 |
> wrote: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> [snip] |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
>>> Developers have only a limited amount of time, and this will |
| 11 |
>>> eat into it. The result is likely to not be new shiny ebuilds |
| 12 |
>>> that use the new EAPIs, but rather old rusty ones that still |
| 13 |
>>> use the old EAPI but also which contain other bugs, since they |
| 14 |
>>> don't get touched at all (since touching them triggers the new |
| 15 |
>>> policy). |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> You dont need to touch the old ebuild, but if you are touching it |
| 18 |
>> for example a version bump, a bug fix etc you should be able to |
| 19 |
>> do the EAPI bump as long as you have done the ebuild quizzes ;) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I'm a proxy maintainer. Meaning I haven't done these quizzes. |
| 22 |
> Heck, I've never even seen them. I catch bug reports, come up with |
| 23 |
> a solution and pass it back to Markos, who then decides whether or |
| 24 |
> not to put it in and give feedback. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> How would this impact me? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
If you are rewriting a full ebuild as your solution, and the ebuild |
| 30 |
you start with is EAPI<4 , then Markos would appreciate it if you |
| 31 |
changed the ebuild to be EAPI=4 (or whatever the latest EAPI is) in |
| 32 |
addition to the fix. Otherwise, just do what you do and Markos |
| 33 |
"should" bump the ebuild to EAPI=4 when he applies your fixes. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 36 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlA/Y1gACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCq1wEAowuUqEMzAj1vFXFrE0fkOkEi |
| 39 |
gt4rKXXuCCxgb0h11WABAKsMa/7OI2dqX/JA6eXSYOAfsdm5vI7IUCY4MirLlT6s |
| 40 |
=jwzi |
| 41 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives