konsolebox <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 1:34 AM Ulrich Müller <[email protected]> wrote: >> +Conversely, removing support for an EAPI from the package manager can >> +be disruptive for users. Unofficial overlays and private repositories >> +often continue using older EAPIs long after their removal from the >> +main tree. Therefore, the timeline for dropping package-manager >> +support is more generous than that for use of EAPIs in repositories. > > What's the point of these supposedly generous long-term support for > old EAPIs when you're dropping support for them in eclasses like > distutils-r1? It's all silly and pointless. > > Yes I've heard there's no obligation for eclass maintainers to support > old EAPIs. Same point applies. You might as well tell overlay owners > to not use ::gentoo's eclasses so these supposedly "long-term" support > become sensible.
In addition to Eli's reply, I'd also say: * Please moderate your tone. * This is an issue I care about (and we've been discussing), and changes like this (and the other one wrt EAPI support/deprecation/banning in ::gentoo) are really prerequisites for a better policy on eclass EAPI support.
