On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:53:27 +0200
Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > I would go for the EAPI bump. Even then I think it would be smart
> > to wait a short while for packages to use this as we ensure that
> > the supporting portage version is stable.
> 
> Err, EAPI was designed to assure that a supporting version is
> actually used, no need to wait then.

Although obviously nothing using such an EAPI version could go stable
until a supporting version of portage goes stable on all relevant
arches (I think of EAPI as an implicit BDEPEND on the package manager
version).

-- 
Kevin F. Quinn

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to