[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI Changes

[Duncan]

Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> posted
20090517111152.133c7280@×××××××××××××××××.ca, excerpted below, on  Sun, 17
May 2009 11:11:52 -0600:

>> Do we want to document the following? (do we have already?) - When is
>> it allowed to use an EAPI in the tree (given as offset to the release
>> of portage supporting that eapi) - When is it allowed to use an EAPI in
>> the stable tree (given as offset of when a portage version supporting
>> that EAPI got stable)
>
> As soon as a version of portage supporting that EAPI is available.

That's a dangerous position to take.  See "experimental" EAPIs for 
instance, sometimes temporarily supported by portage, but NOT for use in 
the tree.

But I think you knew that and simply made some assumptions with the 
statement that not all readers may have.

> This is the entire point of the EAPI, that we don't have to wait X
> amount of time before using new features.  If the user hasn't updated
> portage yet, they simply won't see ebuilds which use the new EAPI.

Agreed.

As I've seen it stated, an EAPI must be approved by council before 
ebuilds using it are allowed in-tree at all.  Procedure there seems to be 
that final approval does not occur until all three PMs support it.  (See 
EAPI-3, now preapproved, but conditional on feature implementation, with 
removal of some feature or other possible before final approval if not 
all PMs support it in a timely manner.)

That's for in-tree.  For arch-stable, the qualifier is no longer all 
three PMs, but only portage, as the default PM at this time.  When a 
portage version supporting the approved EAPI is stable, ebuilds using it 
may be stabilized as well.

But I agree that the point of EAPIs is to avoid delay, and that once an 
EAPI has final approval (as I said, itself conditional on working 
implementation in ~ versions of the PMs), there's no need to wait longer 
to put it in-tree as masked or unstable.  And for stable, once a portage 
with the approved EAPI goes stable, so can packages using it.

That's my understanding of council and QA policy, anyway.  I'm open to 
correction just as I tried to correct the parent, if needed.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman