Conversation
Signed-off-by: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
| should proactively be migrated to new EAPIs. The only allowed exception | ||
| is when the new ebuild is a result of revision bump due to dependency | ||
| change or an important bug fix. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think that there is any such exception. At least for EAPI 4, new ebuilds are unconditionally banned:
https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20180408-summary.txt
Which makes sense, given the fact that the ban is enacted only after a deprecation period of several years.
For EAPIs 0 and 3 we had an exception for "the security team and only the security team" but I think this is no longer relevant:
https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20160110-summary.txt
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still, I would permit revbumps due to dependency changes. It's silly to require other people to update some maintainer's packages just because they have to revbump them. That said, it depends if we call git mv a new ebuild ;-).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Typically such packages don't have active maintainers, so other people doing the EAPI bump isn't so silly.
If we don't apply stricter conditions for banned than for deprecated, then the whole concept of banned EAPIs doesn't make sense.
There would still be time to bring this up for the concil meeting next sunday, i.e., ask for the ban for EAPI 4 to be loosened (agenda is still pending, and chairman is in UTC-8 time zone).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I will bring that up to the ml.
3 participants
Signed-off-by: Michał Górny mgorny@gentoo.org