On 09/02/2016 07:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:13:20 +0200
>> Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Devs,
>>>
>>> I'm wondering whether it wouldn't make sense to require eclasses (or
>>> strongly encourage) to include
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:13:20 +0200
> Kristian Fiskerstrand 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
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:13:20 +0200
Kristian Fiskerstrand 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
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 upda
