Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - council meeting 2020-03-08
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:51:25
Message-Id: w6gimjmdfvy.fsf@kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - council meeting 2020-03-08 by "Michał Górny"
>>>>> On Mon, 02 Mar 2020, Michał Górny wrote:
> Not sure if this is practically able but technically I see an advantage > from having three distinct states:
> 1. Deprecation -- tooling warns about them but there are no consequences > for adding new ebuilds.
> 2. Ban I -- tooling errors out, if developers add new ebuilds > (as in real new ebuilds), we pursue it.
Does this really occur at a scale that should bother us? The main blocker for removal of old EAPIs are unmaintained ebuilds, and for these any levels of more fine-grained bans won't help.
> 3. Ban II -- no ebuilds left, CI fatal, immediate revert.
Ulrich

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies