On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > # This eclass contains backports of functions that were accepted > # by the Council for the EAPI following the EAPI used by ebuild, > # and can be implemented in pure shell script.
I'm not sure that I like this sort of a moving-target definition. When EAPI6 is out, do you intend to have the eclass die at some point for any packages using EAPI5? Or will they work indefinitely, and then the eclass will behave differently depending on what EAPI is used by the ebuild calling it? I can see issues either way (either we're building a monster eclass that basically replicates half of PMS, or we start running into migration issues and maybe even breakage of old systems that aren't updated/etc). If this were about testing EAPI features prior to implementation in a limited and short-term scenario I could maybe see this being a net-positive, but even then we have issues with the eclass changing when users still have packages using it installed. I get what you're trying to do, but I'm a little worried that it might cause as many problems as it solves. --- Rich
