On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 11:51:27 +0100 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > I'd like it spelt out please. > > Here we go: > > > So why not start by imposing deadlines upon more important projects > > like Portage USE deps, [snip] > > USE deps can't be used anyway in EAPI=0 because it would break > current versions of portage. So we need EAPI=1, but you can't say > putting together version 2 of a spec before version 1 was writte is > sane. So we need the EAPI=0 spec. Makes it pretty easy to figure out > why this spec is fairly important.
I disagree. It's very easy and probably the best way of doing things to say "If ebuilds want to use slot deps, use deps or blah, they set EAPI=1. Otherwise, continue as normal.". So far as I'm aware, everything currently planned for EAPI 1 is an extension, not a change in behaviour. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
