On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:38:51 -0500 Jeremy Olexa <darks...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Should the next EAPI (as proposed) be a major "release" in terms of > naming?
We don't use major.minor numbers for EAPI or have a concept like that. It's too much mess. > And should it really be adding features? Well... So far as I can see, the main driving force behind all of this is the immediate need for [use(+)] deps (since developers don't want to have to mess around with complex || statements), and [use(+)] is most definitely a new feature. > With that said, can't bug fixes be implemented without an EAPI bump? If we screw up the specification and catch it early enough on, then yes. But [use(+)] really isn't a bug fix... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
