On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:16:23 -0700 > "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As far as could be determined by the members at the meeting there no >> compelling examples in Gentoo who to change or add global scope >> functions in future EAPIs. As such those problems as stated are not >> in scope for Gentoo because Gentoo is not attempting to do those >> things at this time. > > You mean you don't want per-category/package eclasses, or eclasses that > can indicate that they only work with some EAPIs, or eclasses that can > indicate that they're being used incorrectly, or the death of > EXPORT_FUNCTIONS? All of these have been discussed as desirable future > extensions.
I don't require any of those things, but maybe other people do and If so; they should probably come to the meeting or otherwise make themselves known because they were not at the previous meeting. The GLEP as written is not convincing; it doesn't say 'I am trying to do X with Gentoo and cannot because of this restriction.' It says 'In the future someone may want to do X and they won't be able to because of this restriction so lets try to remove the restriction now.' This is an admirable goal mind you; but it is my opinion that there are more concrete features that we could implement for benefits now rather than talk about what could be. I chatted briefly with peper on IRC about this (as he was the original GLEP author) so when he gets time he said he had some examples to provide. > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh > -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
