Archives
Archives
| From: | Samuel Bernardo <samuelbernardo.mail@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> | ||
| Cc: | gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: EAPI 6 | ||
| Date: | Sat, 14 Mar 2020 20:40:46 | ||
| Message-Id: | b4bc4cae-3e66-202e-9c85-f65a96c5459a@gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: EAPI 6 by Zac Medico |
||
| 1 | Thank you very much Zac for your answers. |
| 2 | |
| 3 | I was wondering if I was missing any coding convention after reading |
| 4 | [1], since I always follow the pattern to define eclasses inside my |
| 5 | overlays as needed, sometimes overriding those provided from gentoo |
| 6 | portage. I was not sure if I was doing the development breaking the |
| 7 | expected QA rules. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | With your explanation I know now that I'm doing it the right way. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | [1] |
| 12 | https://devmanual.gentoo.org/appendices/common-problems/index.html#qa-notice----eclass-foo-inherited-illegally |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: EAPI 6 | Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> |