On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 14:54:56 +0530 Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbh...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I don't see any features in EAPI 3 and 4 that are useful for the > profiles. However, a bump to EAPI 2 (or at least 1) would be > *extremely* beneficial, and cause much less chaos. > > Speaking with my GNOME hat, it will be *extremely* useful for > slot-masking GNOME packages.
If that route is taken, I'd recommend 1 rather than 2, for the simple reason that if 2 is introduced to profiles, we need to have a very careful discussion about the meanings of use dependencies in profile files. For example, people might think they can start masking cat/pkg[flag]. Is this a replacement for package.use.mask or does it mean something else? I have a sneaking suspicion that if there's not a policy saying "no use deps in profiles" then people will start trying to use them for all kinds of horrible hacks that would be better being fixed properly. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
