On 1.9.2011 14.31, Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:02:11 +0300 > Petteri Räty <betelge...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300 >>> Petteri Räty <betelge...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and >>>>> start yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This >>>>> often means users start filling bugs about outdated ebuilds >>>>> requiring maintainers either to ignore that or start updating old >>>>> ebuilds retroactively. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe we should add some kind of devqawarn() function to >>>>> eutils.eclass, which would trigger special QA warnings only when >>>>> ebuild is merged by a developer? This could be triggered e.g. by >>>>> some kind of voluntary make.conf setting. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What's wrong with eqawarn that's already provided by eutils? >>> >>> The first paragraph? >>> >> >> Have Portage defaults so that users only see if them if they read the >> merge logs and then developer profiles can set the settings to log >> them? > > 1) that's changing existing behavior, > 2) what with non-portage users? >
1) eqawarn == devqawarn. I don't see a reason to come up with a new function just to avoid changing Portage configuration. 2) How messages from each e* function is shown is left to the package manager to decide. One thing to note is that we should get eqawarn into the next EAPI. Regards, Petteri
