>>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an >> advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) > This attitude is shitty, and I am willing to wager a really big > bunch of users fall into this category.
Only that there is no real difference to the existing situation when mixing stable and unstable. It is not guaranteed that all dependencies of an unstable package are stable, so already now users may have to accept the ~ keyword for dependencies in some cases. Similarly, such users may have to accept EAPI 6 for some dependencies, which implies that they install a package manager supporting EAPI 6. > I don't think EAPI 6 is *that* shiny, that we need to start using it > prior to stable Portage supporting it. And on what basis would you stabilise Portage, when there are no ebuilds in the tree to test its EAPI 6 code? > It's a potential mess for a huge portion of our users. If we had followed this argument in the past, we would be at EAPI 0 still. Ulrich
pgpgbZkHXRGxW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
