On 2021-03-30 Tue 02:18, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> So yes, maybe we should have a separate spec for forward-compatible
> repository features that are independent of EAPI. But I think that
> incompatible changes won't be possible there and would have to reamin
> in PMS. (For example, updating of packa
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, Tim Harder wrote:
> One reason is EAPI development often moves relatively slowly and many
> potential repo spec features are probably simple enough to
> discuss/implement at a quicker pace, at least initially.
"Relatively slowly" is an understatement when it comes to re
On 2021-03-29 Mon 00:06, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Why not make it a chapter of PMS? A separate document would presumably
> imply having a repository API (RAPI?) decoupled from EAPI?
One reason is EAPI development often moves relatively slowly and many
potential repo spec features are probably simpl
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, Tim Harder wrote:
> Is there any interest these days in developing and maintaining a
> separate repo spec [1]? Among other uses, it would help in describing
> standardized repo features related to metadata/layout.conf settings
> allowing devs to reference a single, canon
