| 1 |
On 02:03 Tue 14 Oct , Jose Luis Rivero wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi all: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Reading a random discussion in our dev mailling list, I came with a |
| 5 |
> doubt about our new EAPI policy and its procedures. I couldn't find it |
| 6 |
> documented nor discussed anywhere so I bringing it here. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Supposing that anyone can currently add an ebuild using EAPI-2 under the |
| 9 |
> testing branch: what are we going to do if an EAPI-2 ebuild (which are |
| 10 |
> only managed by ~arch package managers) needs to go stable due to some |
| 11 |
> kind of major reason like security? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Hypothetical case: foo-1 (eapi-0) marked as stable and foo-2 (eapi-2) |
| 14 |
> with new features marked as testing. A security problem appears |
| 15 |
> affecting both. UPSTREAM release foo-3 to solve the security issue. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> There are some others sceneries but are not so common as the one presented |
| 18 |
> could be. Any decent solution for this case? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
There are only a few obvious ones, you'll have to pick which one you |
| 21 |
like best. Most of the other options basically duplicate these in some |
| 22 |
way or add more work to them for negligible gain: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
- Backport the ebuild from EAPI=2 to EAPI=0 |
| 25 |
- Backport the security patch to the EAPI=0 ebuild |
| 26 |
- Stabilize portage quickly |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Thanks, |
| 30 |
Donnie |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 33 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 34 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
Archives