Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2013-01-08
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 23:40:41
Message-Id: 8276365.58ylrykFZO@porto
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2013-01-08 by "Michał Górny"
1 Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012, 14:37:37 schrieb Michał Górny:
2 >
3 > a) adding new profiles which will require EAPI=5 and requiring all
4 > users to migrate to them after upgrading portage. Using new
5 > use.stable.mask files in those profiles.
6 >
7
8 OK here's one way how we could pull option a) through. After all we have some
9 sort of basic versioning present in the profiles (the 10.0 part that makes no
10 sense otherwise).
11 [Note: this does not cover prefix profiles, BSD and other oddities. Need
12 special treatment.]
13
14 1) Define a new set of profiles by copying the current ones, and replacing the
15 10.0 parent by a 13.0 parent. Only differences between 10.0 and 13.0:
16 * the EAPI, now 5,
17 * e.g. an additional parent profiles/base5 (for global stable mask files)
18
19 2) Deprecate the 10.0 profiles NOW by removing them from profiles.desc and
20 putting the new 13.0 profiles there. This has absolutely no effect on running
21 installations.
22
23 3) Make a news item about removal of 10.0 profiles in a year / ${TIMESCALE}.
24
25 4) One ${TIMESCALE} later, remove 10.0 profiles. This is the ugly part, and
26 users need to be warned and prepared properly - here everyone needs an EAPI5
27 capable portage.
28
29 5) Since now all existing profiles require EAPI 5, move that requirement to
30 the profile root directory.
31
32 Comments?
33
34 --
35 Andreas K. Huettel
36 Gentoo Linux developer
37 dilfridge@g.o
38 http://www.akhuettel.de/

Attachments

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

Replies