On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jeremy Olexa <darks...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Donnie Berkholz wrote: >>> >>> On 21:04 Sun 25 Jan , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:25:44 -0100 >>>> "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvice...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I talked to Zac <zmedico> earlier in #gentoo-portage about adding an >>>>> entry to package.mask for KDE-4.2.0 using slot deps. Thomas >>>>> <tanderson> and Patrick <bonsaikitten> raised the concern we might >>>>> need profile eapis and that PMS nailed p.mask to EAPI-0. >>>>> Zac confirmed that the first stable version to support slot deps in p. >>>>> mask was 2.1.3.16, that it was stabled in bug 197165 - 14 months ago >>>>> - - and that the first stages to include it were the 2008.0 stages. >>>>> Thus, can we finally give the ok to use slot deps in package.mask? Can >>>>> we also give the ok to use it everywhere in all 2008.0 and later >>>>> profiles/ ? >>>> >>>> The Council approved profile eapi files for use a while ago (can't >>>> remember when -- http://council.gentoo.org/ isn't being updated), and >>> >>> Last month's meeting >>> >>>> they discussed timeframes for using newer EAPIs then too. Did you see >>>> that discussion? >>> >>> "An EAPI=0 profile always needs to exist so that users with old portage >>> can upgrade. Otherwise they will sync and have no valid profile available so >>> cannot emerge a new version of portage. >>> >>> "Decision: Approved. Existing stable profiles must use EAPI=0. New or dev >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>> profiles can use higher EAPIs. >> >> Acoording to this we will never be able to use slot deps in package.mask >> as it's a global file. Given my first mail, can we agree to make EAPI-1 >> the minimum EAPI for files under profiles/ ? Can we also create a rule >> on how / when to update the minimum EAPI in profiles/ ? > > So, portage that is unaware of EAPI-1 will just happily ignore the atom and > move on..? In that case: > > Please no! It is hard enough for a base 2007.0 install to be upgraded due to > the "portage & bash blocker" (and other issues) - We need to wait much > longer for an EAPI bump in a non-new profile (if ever, as Brian Harring > suggests - I agree). > > I know this might seem as a hassle to you but there *are* other entities > that provide a base 2007.0 install. Who knows how every > group/entity/company/etc use Gentoo.. While I agree that it isn't > necessarily our problem, however, we shouldn't make it harder for them or > anyone that has a 2007 base install. (We still mirror the 2007.0 stages[1], > 2007.0 cds are available[2] for purchase, etc[3] etc[4]).
Dude, even people like Ubuntu/Canonical don't support stuff that old (current LTS is April 2008). The tree is now; see the date? It's 2009, not 2007. One of the biggest problems Gentoo has is backwards compatibility and legacy stuff; it is the nightmare of every project and there has to be a point where you say 'tough.' So make a decision, announce it widely that on X date the tree will just break for users; write up a FAQ on how to upgrade past it, and then make the changes. Realize once again that the tree was not designed very well and it has issues on a number of levels and it can't all be engineered around; and for progress to be made you will *have to break existing stuff*. > > IMO, it would be a dis-service to bump EAPI in a non-new profile for our > user-base. I don't see any Pro's besides "easier to type" =/ So, I think the > Council decision is appropriate. You seriously see no benefits to EAPI 1 or 2 in profiles? What about slot deps? use deps? these things have been core feature requests since 2003; surely you don't think they are useless to our users? > > -Jeremy > > [1]: http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/x86/2007.0/ > [2]: http://www.linuxcd.org/view_distro.php?lst=&id_cate=20&id_distro=12 > [3]: http://lylix.net/linux-vps-plans > [4]: http://www.linode.com/faq.cfm > >> >>> "Ref: >>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_930f58fcebcbbcbe523c001f2c825179.xml"; >>> >>> >>> I haven't finished & posted last month's summary >>> <http://dev.gentoo.org/~dberkholz/20081211-summary.txt> yet because of a >>> long holiday vacation and lots of work deadlines after returning. I'll get >>> all that stuff updated this week. >>> > > >
