On 10/15/11 2:42 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:54, Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change >> line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage as >> they increment EAPI. I am confident that nothing EAPI <= 3 would break. >> >> Is anyone (especially djc and the python herd members) opposed to this? > > Seems fine to me; I can't really think of a practical better way.
Thank you, change committed to CVS then. Hopefully nobody will get upset about this. I'll wait a few days before I start using EAPI-4 in ebuilds using python.eclass, but I've done local tests and everything works fine (for the ebuild I (co-)maintain).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
