>>>>> On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> > wrote: >> I'd rather argue in terms of time instead of version numbers, >> because of the upgrade path for old systems. We guarantee one year >> for stable systems, but IMHO we should be more conservative for >> EAPI deprecation and go for two or three years there.
> By EAPI deprecation it is meant that we discourage using the old > EAPI in the tree. Right, the above was about ebuilds in the tree, not about package managers. At least sys-apps/portage and its dependencies must stay at an EAPI that is stable long enough to allow an upgrade of old systems (where Portage might not recognise the newest EAPI). > Removing support for it from a package manager should of course > happen much later (well after it is banned). The package manager must be able to uninstall old packages, which essentially means that support for old EAPIs cannot be removed. Ulrich
pgppm3oJ0Ijmk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
