On 09/04/2012 05:06 PM, Brian Harring wrote: >> >> As a compromise, it could be made policy that "bump to EAPI=foo" bugs >> are valid. If someone would benefit from such a bump, he can file a bug >> and know that it won't be closed WONTFIX. On the other hand, the dev is >> under no more pressure than usual to do the bump. > > If you attach a patch and have done the legwork, sure. > > If you're just opening bugs w/ "bump to EAPI=monkeys", bluntly, it's > noise and it's annoying. EAPI bump requests for pkgs that need to > move forward so an eclass can be cleaned up/moved forward, sure, but > arbitrary "please go bump xyz" without a specific reason (and/or > legwork done if not) isn't helpful. Kind of equivalent to zero-day > bump requests in my view in terms of usefulness.
Except this is what we have now, and isn't a compromise at all.
