Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting on 2022-02-13

[Sam James]

On Sat, 05 Feb 2022 08:37:17 +0100
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:

> >>>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Marek Szuba wrote:
>
> > The next Gentoo Council meeting will take place on 2022-02-13
> > (Sunday), starting 19:00 UTC.
>
> > Please reply to this e-mail with proposed agenda items. If you
> > suggested anything between the last council meeting and now, you are
> > encouraged to raise the matter again in this thread and include
> > link(s) to your earlier communication.
>
> As I had announced in the January meeting, I'd ask the Council to
> pre-approve the list of features for EAPI 9, as listed here:

Please post a statement of intent / RFC to the gentoo-dev ML to
solicit feedback and give others time to make proposals too.

If I've missed such an email, my apologies (as I'm currently on
another machine than usual for mail), but I didn't see one when I
looked.

I do applaud this moving-a-bit-quicker / agile approach, but
it's important we give a chance for people to raise features
they've been looking to land, and so on.

>
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Future_EAPI/EAPI_9_tentative_features
>
> - Eclass revisions [1]
> - EAPI of profiles defaults to repository EAPI [2]
> - Allow comments in profile parent files [3]
> - econf: Ensure proper end of string in configure --help output [4]
>
> This will be an EAPI with few new features, and its motivation is
> mainly to have eclass revisions. The second and third feature will
> affect only profiles, and the fourth feature is effectively a bug fix.
>
> There were also ideas about no longer exporting A (or alternatively,
> any variables) to the ebuild environment [5], but nobody has come
> forward with a concrete proposal yet. So, IMHO it will need more
> discussion and won't be ready for EAPI 9; developers who have asked
> for the feature may consider leading that discussion. IIUC, these
> would be the TeX and Go maintainers.

I didn't see said maintainers CCed on this email so I've CCed them
on this reply.

I still think this is quite an important issue and it'd be a huge
shame to do an EAPI 9 without it given its urgency may well lead
to doing an EAPI 10 if it's left unresolved.

A compromise / workaround would be the Go maintainers working on
some tooling to make it easier to tar up the needed modules and
avoid huge SRC_URI.

>
> Ulrich
>
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/806592
> [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/806181
> [3] https://bugs.gentoo.org/470094
> [4] https://bugs.gentoo.org/815169
> [5] https://bugs.gentoo.org/721088

best,
sam