1 |
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:13:41 -0700 |
2 |
Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:26:41PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
5 |
> > >>>>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > > On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 12:11:38 +0200 |
8 |
> > > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > >> >>>>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
10 |
> > >> >> > * Get a versionator replacement into the PM |
11 |
> > >> >> |
12 |
> > >> >> Given the long time it's been in limbo I doubt that this will |
13 |
> > >> >> be a quick feature. (But I'll be glad if you convince me of |
14 |
> > >> >> the opposite.) |
15 |
> > >> |
16 |
> > >> > I thought we just didn't have that because we couldn't add new |
17 |
> > >> > global scope functions. |
18 |
> > >> |
19 |
> > >> But can we already for EAPI 5? Wouldn't the following: |
20 |
> > >> |
21 |
> > >> EAPI=5 |
22 |
> > >> MY_PV=$(new_pm_version_mangler_function ${PV}) |
23 |
> > >> |
24 |
> > >> still fail for old package managers that don't implement EAPI |
25 |
> > >> parsing? |
26 |
> > |
27 |
> > > Didn't the Council effectively vote to ignore that problem? |
28 |
> > |
29 |
> > Yes, but after some reasonable transition period. |
30 |
> |
31 |
> <insert my ongoing "Gee, lovely fucking approach to designing a |
32 |
> compatibility mechanism"/> |
33 |
> |
34 |
> For EAPI5, all global scope functionality/bash version/take your pick |
35 |
> has to be taken off the table, and held back till EAPI6- w/ the |
36 |
> timeline for EAPI6 being "a reasonable transition period" after EAPI5 |
37 |
> has been stabled in portage. |
38 |
|
39 |
Usually, the transition period ends when we no longer bikeshed |
40 |
the topic. |
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
Best regards, |
44 |
Michał Górny |