Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Cc: ferringb@×××××.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 06:47:11
Message-Id: 20120429084727.46f38444@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5 by Brian Harring
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

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] EAPI 5 Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>