On 16:46 Fri 31 Dec , "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 12/31/10 12:13 PM, Petteri Räty wrote: > > EAPI 0 might stick around for quite a while but for example deprecating > > EAPI 1 shouldn't be as hard. > > That seems also to be a safe first step. EAPI-1 ebuilds were at least > written with EAPIs in mind. That's obviously not true for EAPI-0. > > We could even deprecate EAPI-2 in favor of EAPI-3, hmmm.... > > I think a repoman non-fatal warning would be fine. If we have a warning > about forcing -j1, we can surely have one about ancient EAPIs.
I'm in favor of documenting things such that the latest EAPI is the standard and others are backwards diffs based on it, shifted to appendices or somewhere out of the way. This will encourage people to easily use the latest developments rather than trying to build up a mental stack of added and removed features across multiple levels. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
pgpoajUBHwB8n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
