On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:52:13 +0200 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You should instead be asking the pkgcore guys why they should be > > allowed to continue keeping a package in the tree when they're > > blatantly ignoring the EAPI process. > > The eapi process is something not defined so they cannot do much > about it, same for the portage people.
The EAPI process requires that any package manager that claims to support a particular EAPI really does. When someone releases a package manager that has significant bugs in new EAPI handling, we have to decide: * whether we can use the EAPI in the tree * whether we have to avoid the bits of that EAPI that are broken * whether we have to release a new EAPI n+1 that's identical to EAPI n, and completely ban EAPI n. Package manager maintainers refusing to do basic testing before claiming support for a new EAPI has very messy consequences. If package manager maintainers aren't going to do the responsible thing, the whole point of EAPIs is lost. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
