Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The fallacies of GLEP55
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 14:58:06
Message-Id: 20090516155709.4847f2aa@snowmobile
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: The fallacies of GLEP55 by Steven J Long
1 On Sat, 16 May 2009 15:50:39 +0100
2 Steven J Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
3 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
4 > > On Sat, 16 May 2009 11:27:10 +0200
5 > > Tobias Klausmann <klausman@g.o> wrote:
6 > >> Change the spec, then.
7 > >
8 > > If we change the spec, we can't do anything with the change until
9 > > we're absolutely sure that everyone's updated both their ebuilds
10 > > and their package manager for it.
11 > >
12 > Isn't that what the EAPI process is for?
13 >
14 > The "support every overlay and old version of portage known to Gentoo"
15 > is a "straw man" as one hears so much of. GLEP-55 makes explicit
16 > mention of waiting for 2008.0 to ship, and Gentoo is ultimately only
17 > responsible for the software it ships, including sunrise.
18
19 You've missed the point. The point is, the EAPI process can't avoid the
20 "huge wait before we can use it" for certain types of change that
21 would be extremely useful. GLEP 55 fixes this limitation, and it's the
22 *only* thing that fixes this limitation.
23
24 --
25 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The fallacies of GLEP55 Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o>