On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:53:15 +0200 Ralph Sennhauser <s...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The EAPI=0 requirement comes from having to provide an update path for > systems with a package manager without EAPI support. By now we are > talking about really ancient systems and it's questionable if there is > any merit in supporting such. > > Further the situation is that some of the maintainers of must be EAPI 0 > ebuilds already moved on as the majority of users will profit from a > bump. As a result the clean upgrade path is already borked and the > value of keeping others at EAPI=0 deteriorates further and further. Yeah as soon as python went it was pretty much pointless. I don't see any value in forcing system packages to EAPI 0 anymore. Everything you're saying makes sense to me at least. I'd argue against deprecating EAPI 0 any time soon though. Killing EAPI 1 would be a better idea. -- gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets we were never more here, expanse getting broader @ gentoo.org but bigger boats been done by less water
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
