| 1 |
On 20.10.2012 14.25, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 6:14 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I don't see why EAPI bumps should be handled differently from other |
| 4 |
>> changes to the ebuild. If the installed files don't change, why would |
| 5 |
>> one impose upon the user to recompile the package? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> It would probably be best for this reason to wait until the package |
| 8 |
> actually does change to do an EAPI bump. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> One thing that would concern me is testing - I don't like the idea of |
| 11 |
> stable packages changing in any way, since that bypasses the testing |
| 12 |
> cycle (both the formal cycle by the arch team, and the informal one by |
| 13 |
> being keyworded for testing for 30 days). |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I don't think changing EAPI for stable packages is allowed. That means |
| 17 |
we are only talking about testing packages for this thread and I think |
| 18 |
there it's fine to follow the established rule already mentioned. If |
| 19 |
developers break things continuously without testing, take up the issue |
| 20 |
with QA. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Regards, |
| 23 |
Petteri |
Archives