1 |
> On 19 Oct 2021, at 00:24, Francesco Riosa <vivo75@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Sorry but portage is too strictly related to the ebuilds in tree, recent removal of EAPI=5 from most eclasses underlined that. |
4 |
> Or to put id differently if you want a LTS portage you also need a certain number of "protected" eclasses and ebuilds |
5 |
> It seems a lot of (very appreciated but don't count on me) work |
6 |
|
7 |
FWIW, I don't think it'd be a big deal to just agree that we wouldn't rip out old EAPI support from eclasses |
8 |
and also slow down with adopting new EAPIs for ebuilds (which there's vague consensus about wrt EAPI 8 |
9 |
being done a bit too quickly anyway). |
10 |
|
11 |
i.e. I don't think this is really a blocker. |
12 |
|
13 |
Best, |
14 |
sam |