1 |
On Wed, 09 Feb 2022 08:18:07 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> >>>>> On Wed, 09 Feb 2022, Sam James wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> > On Sat, 05 Feb 2022 08:37:17 +0100 |
7 |
> > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> >> As I had announced in the January meeting, I'd ask the Council to |
10 |
> >> pre-approve the list of features for EAPI 9, as listed here: |
11 |
> |
12 |
> > Please post a statement of intent / RFC to the gentoo-dev ML to |
13 |
> > solicit feedback and give others time to make proposals too. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> There is no special time period for making such proposals; future EAPI |
16 |
> bugs can be filed at any time. Preferably, they should be filed early, |
17 |
> because we've had very bad experience with including last-minute |
18 |
> features. |
19 |
|
20 |
Agreed on the latter point, but this doesn't mean a simple courtesy |
21 |
notice would be problematic. |
22 |
|
23 |
Not everyone will be aware EAPI 9 is in the works; in particular, it's |
24 |
useful for our downstreams to know and possibly suggest any improvements |
25 |
given they're not likely to be as aware of day-to-day developments in |
26 |
Gentoo, and it's useful as a final poke to notify people that if indeed |
27 |
they feel something should be in the next EAPI (or "soon"), they should |
28 |
file a bug and so on. |
29 |
|
30 |
I am not saying any such requests must be accepted for EAPI 9. But |
31 |
engaging with the community with a notice isn't a bad thing? |
32 |
|
33 |
Someone could easily think the next EAPI is years away and therefore |
34 |
feel no urgency to flesh out their (possibly very simple) idea or |
35 |
improvement. |
36 |
|
37 |
> |
38 |
> > If I've missed such an email, my apologies (as I'm currently on |
39 |
> > another machine than usual for mail), but I didn't see one when I |
40 |
> > looked. |
41 |
> |
42 |
> > I do applaud this moving-a-bit-quicker / agile approach, but |
43 |
> > it's important we give a chance for people to raise features |
44 |
> > they've been looking to land, and so on. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> That is not how it works. The workflow is documented here: |
47 |
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification/Future_EAPI_process |
48 |
> |
49 |
|
50 |
I don't see anything on that page which precludes giving the gentoo-dev |
51 |
mailing list (so our developers & the general community) a heads up |
52 |
on an upcoming process. |
53 |
|
54 |
best, |
55 |
sam |