On 09/02/2016 07:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:13:20 +0200 >> Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Devs, >>> >>> I'm wondering whether it wouldn't make sense to require eclasses (or >>> strongly encourage) to include an explicit list of EAPIs it has been >>> tested for in order to ease testing when introducing new EAPIs. >>> >>> We have seen some issues already with EAPI6 bump related to get_libdir >>> and people updating EAPI in ebuild without properly testing the >>> inherited eclasses. having a whitelist in place and die if eclass is >>> not updated to handle it solves it. >>> >>> Thoughts? comments? cookies? threats? >>> >> >> Never liked to wait for a whole eclass update for a new eapi when I >> only use a couple functions from it that I have tested when updating an >> ebuild. >> > > I think the idea is a sound one though. And there is no reason it > couldn't be tweaked to give the option to set it at the function level > and not the eclass level. This is also an argument for simplifying > eclasses when it makes sense (I realize this will never be 100%). >
If specific functions can be useful there is also a case to be made for refactoring of the code -- Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP certificate reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
