Am Freitag, 6. April 2007 00:41 schrieb Vlastimil Babka:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> >>> Breaking EAPI=0 via pushing slot deps in isn't much of an option
> >>> in my opinion; usual "needs to have been on release media for at
> >>> least 6
> >>
> >> We can push for an EAPI=1 == (EAPI=0 + slot deps)...
> >
> > Can, yep, although that was originally blocked by "EAPI=0 must be
> > defined", which folks seem to have backed off on.
>
> Not sure if slot deps themselves could even replace version ranges
> hacks without also solving bug 4315 (native version ranges) in all
> cases. IMHO it should be possible at least to specify slot+usual
> version limit, to make it worth EAPI bump.
Please have a look at the slot dep format proposal. AFAIK none of the
P{aludis,kgcore,ortage} devs disagreed on that.
>
> > One issue with adding EAPI=1 having just slot deps is that it skips
> > out on some long term changes intended- default src_install for
>
> So what, longer term changes could wait for EAPI=2. Why not make
> experience with EAPI bumping with something smaller for a start,
> instead of trying to make one big bump that will bring all changes we
> can think of now, but will be implemented only in 2010...
I agree fully. Nobody said we can't finetune the EAPI steps/bumps.
> Now it may look like I contradict myself saying to bump ASAP but not
> without solving bug 4315 first. But I see slot deps without limits
> only half of a feature.
Nobody but talked about that.
Danny
--
Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
