| 1 |
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Next item: provided that EAPI 7 is approved, we'd have 4 'live' EAPIs |
| 4 |
> in motion [1]. I'd like therefore request the Council to vote on: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> a. banning EAPI 4 for new ebuilds (and EAPI bumps of existing ebuilds). |
| 7 |
> It has been deprecated on 2015-10-11. In the past, deprecated EAPIs were |
| 8 |
> banned within 11/23 months from deprecation, so we're overdue. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Fine with me. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> 2. deprecating EAPI 5. In case of EAPIs 3-4 they were deprecated 4-5 |
| 13 |
> years after being added. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I think a better indicator is the time between support for EAPI n+1 in |
| 16 |
stable Portage, and deprecation of EAPI n (see [1]). Using this, I get |
| 17 |
37 months for EAPI 2, 35 months for EAPI 3, and 34 months for EAPI 4 |
| 18 |
deprecation. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> EAPI 6 has been added on 2015-11-13, and even toolchain team already |
| 21 |
> uses it, so there's really no reason to use EAPI 5 anymore. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Stable Portage supports EAPI 6 since 2016-01-17, i.e. since 26 months. |
| 24 |
So we would be somewhat on the early side. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
What worries me more is that deprecation of EAPI 5 would apply to |
| 27 |
profiles too. However, all profiles are still at EAPI 5 at this point, |
| 28 |
and I don't see any value in upgrading them to EAPI 6. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Ulrich |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification#Council_approval_and_use_in_Gentoo_repository |
Archives