On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:59:39 +0200 Jose Luis Rivero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:38:34PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > On 02:03 Tue 14 Oct , Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > > > > > There are some others sceneries but are not so common as the one > > > presented could be. Any decent solution for this case? > > > > There are only a few obvious ones, you'll have to pick which one > > you like best. Most of the other options basically duplicate these > > in some way or add more work to them for negligible gain: > > > > - Backport the ebuild from EAPI=2 to EAPI=0 > > EAPI-2 to EAPI-0 could imply lot of changes (not talking about what is > going to happen when we release new and more feature rich EAPIs), and > changes usually come with bugs. The ebuild is committed directly to > stable implies bugs in stable, which for me is a no-go. Assuming the ebuild changes between foo-1 and foo-2 are mainly due to the change from EAPI=0 to EAPI=2 (which I'd expect to be true in many cases) you could just reuse the foo-1 ebuild for foo-3. If there are major differences between foo-1 and foo-2 not related to the EAPI change then the maintainer probably didn't want foo-2 to become stable anytime soon, so it's at least questionable if foo-3 should go straight to stable in the first place. And adding a new version directly to stable always comes with a risk, you can't eliminate that completely. It's all about risk assessment, and how much work you're willing to do or time you want to spend to minimize the risk. > > - Backport the security patch to the EAPI=0 ebuild > > Which sometimes is going to be impossible, require lot of work, and we > fall into the risk of bad backported patches when non trivial backport > patches are needed (which turns into buggy patches in the stable > branch) And sometimes it's a very viable option when patches are provided by upstream. In the end at least one of the above solutions should work in almost every case. It might sometimes cause a bit more work than a bump that doesn't involve any EAPI changes, but that's life. If you have a real case where both suggested solutions aren't realistic I'd like to hear about it, otherwise I think we're wasting time making up solutions for a non-existant problem Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
