Roy Bamford wrote: > What about the case where the new EAPI breaks backwards compatibility > with existing package managers, as would be the case with glep 55? > > Its quite true that such changes can be introduced after a wait and > only upset late adoptors. By implementing the key feature of glep 55, > which is making the EAPI known to the PM without sourcing the ebuild, > we would only need one last wait to introduce new features in this > way in later EAPIs.PMs would then know the EAPI in advance and ignore > ebuilds using EAPIs they don't understand.
But still then the special case I mentioned comes in. Newer version migrated to newer EAPI. Urgent bump for security reasons is necessary. Backporting the ebuild is necessary. Not that likely, but iirc we had that special case for EAPI-2. Putting in a wait for 4 or 8 weeks or whatever doesn't cost us anything but does simplify things and gives us a clear deployment process. I do know we have developers with nil interest in our stable branch, but we also have users heavily relying on our stable branch. Tobias
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
