On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Martin Vaeth <mar...@mvath.de> wrote: > Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >> Proposal 3a might be: Anytime an RDEPEND in an eclass is changed, the >> eclass must be revisioned unless all ebuilds in the gentoo repository >> will continue to work correctly with the old RDEPEND. >> Proposal 4a might be: Anytime an RDEPEND in an eclass is changed, all >> ebuilds that inherit the eclass in the gentoo repository must be >> revisioned if they will not continue to work correctly with the old >> RDEPEND. > > Adding an || alternative should be included here: > The installed package would continue to work without that alternative, > but without a revbump the user is not able to see that he might > possibly drop a package. >
Ugh, I agree completely but this isn't going to make the wording prettier. Perhaps add "or if the new RDEPEND allows the ebuild to work with additional dependencies." Or maybe just straight out say "or if additional || atoms are added." The first wording might allow for additional cases, which is probably good. Otherwise a change is made today without a revbump and a year later somebody removes some package from the tree and random users run into problems with it. -- Rich
