Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2016-01-10
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 09:29:28
Message-Id: 22158.12275.461415.439120@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2016-01-10 by Daniel Campbell
1 >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Daniel Campbell wrote:
2
3 >> I would like the council to vote on banning EAPIs 0 and 3: "EAPIs 0
4 >> and 3 are banned. This ban includes both new ebuilds and updating
5 >> the EAPI in existing ebuilds."
6 >>
7 >> Since EAPI 1 is on its way out of the tree (only 13 ebuilds left as
8 >> of today), I think we should also drop the exception which had been
9 >> added in the 2014-03-11 meeting: "In case of non-maintainer commits
10 >> to fix dependencies, EAPI=0 ebuilds may be updated to EAPI=1 to
11 >> keep the changes at a non-intrusive level, as a temporary
12 >> workaround."
13
14 > Is there a particular reason EAPI 2 is left alone, or has it already
15 > been deprecated/banned?
16
17 EAPIs 1 and 2 have been banned already in 2014:
18 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification#EAPI_life_cycle
19
20 > I'm generally in favor of lowering the number of EAPIs we need to
21 > worry about, especially since iirc EAPI 6 brings a handful of nice
22 > things to the table.
23
24 Ulrich