> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Lars Wendler wrote:
> I don'f feel very well with this idea especially because no matter
> how hard I try I don't get comfortable with EAPI-3. No offense to
> our prefix guys, you surely did a hell of a good job and EAPI-3
> seems to really get you out of quite some trou
On 25/01/11 22:33, Lars Wendler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don'f feel very well with this idea especially because no matter how hard I
> try I don't get comfortable with EAPI-3. No offense to our prefix guys, you
> surely did a hell of a good job and EAPI-3 seems to really get you out of
> quite some t
2011-01-25 22:33:16 Lars Wendler napisał(a):
> Hi,
>
> I don'f feel very well with this idea especially because no matter how hard I
> try I don't get comfortable with EAPI-3. No offense to our prefix guys, you
> surely did a hell of a good job and EAPI-3 seems to really get you out of
> quite
Hi,
I don'f feel very well with this idea especially because no matter how hard I
try I don't get comfortable with EAPI-3. No offense to our prefix guys, you
surely did a hell of a good job and EAPI-3 seems to really get you out of
quite some trouble you had with earlier EAPIs, but...
I for my
On Tuesday 25 January 2011 20:13:40 Thomas Sachau wrote:
>
> The (maybe inofficial) suggestion is already to use the latest EAPI in new
> ebuilds. This is ok for
> me, as long as it is a suggestion. The same goes for the migration of ebuilds
> to the latest EAPI.
> But i am against the idea to en
Am 25.01.2011 17:40, schrieb Peter Volkov:
> В Втр, 25/01/2011 в 14:33 +0100, Thomas Sachau пишет:
>> Do you have some more arguments for your request? Most new developers
>> will have to know about all EAPi versions anyway since they join an
>> existing team with existing ebuilds, which will mostl
2011-01-25 15:34:58 Thomas Sachau napisał(a):
> This means, that you either have to convince the python eclass maintainers to
> reduce the complexity
> of their eclass
There are plans to remove some EAPI-specific behavior by removing support for
old EAPIs.
E.g. when there are no remaining ebuild
В Втр, 25/01/2011 в 14:33 +0100, Thomas Sachau пишет:
> Do you have some more arguments for your request? Most new developers
> will have to know about all EAPi versions anyway since they join an
> existing team with existing ebuilds, which will mostly not use the
> newest EAPI.
>
> As an argument
On 1/25/11 1:29 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Why would we need subproject for this.
The idea was that if you want to introduce a new policy, you should also
provide resources to make it possible. The below satisfies most of that.
> QA team itself is done to help developers with this tasks. So if so
Am 25.01.2011 15:09, schrieb Tomáš Chvátal:
> Dne 25.1.2011 14:33, Thomas Sachau napsal(a):
>> Do you have some more arguments for your request? Most new developers will
>> have to know about all
>> EAPi versions anyway since they join an existing team with existing ebuilds,
>> which will mostly
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 25.1.2011 14:33, Thomas Sachau napsal(a):
> Do you have some more arguments for your request? Most new developers will
> have to know about all
> EAPi versions anyway since they join an existing team with existing ebuilds,
> which will mostly not
Am 25.01.2011 12:20, schrieb Tomáš Chvátal:
> Hi,
> I would like to upgrade tree-wide policy for EAPI usage in main tree.
> Currently we say that developers can use any named version they wish or
> find sufficient.
> I would on other hand like to have all ebuilds to use Latest EAPI
> version possib
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:32:27PM +0100, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dne 25.1.2011 13:25, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:13:06PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> >> How about creating a project (possibly a subproject of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 25.1.2011 13:25, Markos Chandras napsal(a):
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:13:06PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> How about creating a project (possibly a subproject of QA or something
>> else) that would help people do that? In case of no resp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dne 25.1.2011 13:13, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." napsal(a):
> On 1/25/11 12:20 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>> I would like to upgrade tree-wide policy for EAPI usage in main tree.
>
> I have a great idea for you.
>
> How about creating a project (possibly a sub
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:13:06PM +0100, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 1/25/11 12:20 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> > I would like to upgrade tree-wide policy for EAPI usage in main tree.
>
> I have a great idea for you.
>
> How about creating a project (possibly a subproject of QA or something
>
On 1/25/11 12:20 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> I would like to upgrade tree-wide policy for EAPI usage in main tree.
I have a great idea for you.
How about creating a project (possibly a subproject of QA or something
else) that would help people do that? In case of no response from
maintainers just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I would like to upgrade tree-wide policy for EAPI usage in main tree.
Currently we say that developers can use any named version they wish or
find sufficient.
I would on other hand like to have all ebuilds to use Latest EAPI
version possible (given
18 matches
Mail list logo
