| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:47:37 +0100
|
| 5 |
Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@g.o> wrote:
|
| 6 |
> >> Removing eclass functions like this is not allowed by current |
| 7 |
> >> policy. If you want to do it, you should discuss about changing |
| 8 |
> >> policy. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > since when? |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> Since ever. |
| 13 |
> If you change eclass abi you need to rename it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
No, that's not been the case 'since ever' at all. It used to be that if
|
| 16 |
you changed or removed a function, you just had to make sure you didn't
|
| 17 |
break anything. This was made more complicated by the way that eclasses
|
| 18 |
in the tree were used for removing installed packages too, which is no
|
| 19 |
longer an issue.
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
- --
|
| 22 |
Ciaran McCreesh
|
| 23 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 24 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkuOWnAACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHcgACgj8hDz+sIgvCbqXeotvUqHyYr
|
| 27 |
v2wAoJzESPARQnPDaWhrbFNiK0zHp2G2
|
| 28 |
=RzSg
|
| 29 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives