On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:23:08 +0800 Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quite the opposite. EAPI's are designed to live happily together in > > the same repository. A current example: most (or lots...) ebuilds in > > the tree don't need EAPI="1" and it's pointless to migrate all of > > them. We can switch EAPI on an as needed basis. > > But EAPI's can not always co-exist harmoniously. > What if a future EAPI come up with a totally new DEPENDENCY > setting[1], which is incompatible with existing ones.
DEPENDENCIES can exist in the same tree as *DEPEND. They can't exist within the same ebuild, but that's OK because you can't mix EAPIs at that level. > I really don't see the necessity to have so many EAPI's A new EAPI is needed for new features, so new EAPIs will be needed in the future. Equally, migrating the whole tree at once to newer EAPIs is a) a lot of unnecessary work, and b) unnecessarily irritating to people using older package managers. > especially PM specific EAPI. We can't have PM specific EAPI, > otherwise we are risking forking/splitting ourself. Package manager EAPIs don't belong in the main tree, but they have uses outside of it. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
