On 24-10-2009 22:37:30 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote: > > The suggestion was to just introduce EAPI=3 with these variables, and > > making everything which is scheduled for current EAPI=3 just EAPI=4. I > > was told we could quite quickly have a Portage in the tree that would > > set ED and EROOT for EAPI=3 that way. > > Maybe 2+prefix is a more describing name? This would avoid changing what > EAPI 3 means.
Naming is up to others, from my point of view. > > Are there any objections to this? If not, I'd like to put this on the > > agenda for the next council meeting. > > As the council decided to add new stuff in the last meeting if zac is > starting to implement new EAPIs this could go into EAPI 3 too. Yes, this was implicit, the next EAPI should contain the same support too. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level