Andreas K. Huettel posted on Sat, 12 Dec 2015 21:29:30 +0100 as excerpted: > Am Samstag, 12. Dezember 2015, 10:15:05 schrieb Duncan: >> >> What I would have expected to see here (and in other docs-related >> patches) would be cleanly separate EAPI-5 vs. EAPI-6 descriptions, on >> separate lines, so when EAPI-5 support cleanup time comes, it's easy >> to simply delete EAPI-5 lines. Something like: >> > Well... In a way that certainly makes sense. However, ... > > Once this is out I would personally prefer all bumps to be also EAPI > bumps, and all new perl-module.eclass ebuilds to use EAPI=6. Adding > extensive documentation about EAPI=5 seems to be counterproductive > there.
What I was (perhaps too) gently hinting was that docs aren't just for devs. Users use them too, when debugging existing ebuild failures, etc. Presumably existing EAPI-5 perl-module.eclass consuming ebuilds will be around, at least in stable, for a few months, correct? But upon closer look I see only functions were previously documented (as of my tree from 10 days ago anyway), so you're adding var documentation that wasn't there at all earlier and it's not a labeling regression after all. Given that any documentation is better than none... I understand doing it the way you did it, now. =:^) Tho I'd still probably put that last EAPI-5 sentence on its own line, again, making EAPI-5 cleanup when the time comes that much easier. =:^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
