On 09/02/2012 09:46 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfri...@gentoo.org> > wrote: >> What I dont actually understand at all is why bumping the EAPI should be so >> complicated or involved that it even deserves so much resistance... > > <rant>Ok, it REALLY annoys me when people pull out this kind of a line > in an argument... If it isn't all that complicated or involved and it > just makes so much sense, then why do we bother to waste time asking > for it to be made policy, since obviously everybody will just do it > anyway... > > Believe it or not, people who take up an opposing side in a debate > don't ALWAYS do it because they're simply dumber than you. That is, > unless they're arguing with me... :) </rant> >
I think everyone would be happier if all ebuilds in the tree were EAPI4. On the other hand, Rich is right that making this a policy will have the opposite of the intended effect: developers just won't fix bugs in EAPI<4 ebuilds when they don't have time to do the EAPI bump (one could easily spend a few hours on this). As a compromise, it could be made policy that "bump to EAPI=foo" bugs are valid. If someone would benefit from such a bump, he can file a bug and know that it won't be closed WONTFIX. On the other hand, the dev is under no more pressure than usual to do the bump.
