-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:22:43 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> On 20/09/12 02:24 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:23:51 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius
> > <a...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> I'm biased, so to me just auditing what portage does would be
> >> good enough. :D
> >
> > You also need to audit what Portage did since EAPI 0 was
> > introduced.
>
> No, I don't think so. What portage does *now* is the important thing
> for EAPI={0,1,2,3,4,5}, not what it has done over the course of
> history.
That would defeat the whole point of having stable EAPIs.
- --
Ciaran McCreesh
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlBbbwMACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHgVACfa/bWAigEnxFiVNU7aJDipgCp
KK0AnAqHNSqKvJDIPglUFvF3WOu64fWj
=nptC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
