On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Michael Orlitzky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/04/2012 05:06 PM, Brian Harring wrote: >>> >>> As a compromise, it could be made policy that "bump to EAPI=foo" bugs >>> are valid. If someone would benefit from such a bump, he can file a bug >>> and know that it won't be closed WONTFIX. On the other hand, the dev is >>> under no more pressure than usual to do the bump. >> >> If you attach a patch and have done the legwork, sure. >> >> If you're just opening bugs w/ "bump to EAPI=monkeys", bluntly, it's >> noise and it's annoying. EAPI bump requests for pkgs that need to >> move forward so an eclass can be cleaned up/moved forward, sure, but >> arbitrary "please go bump xyz" without a specific reason (and/or >> legwork done if not) isn't helpful. Kind of equivalent to zero-day >> bump requests in my view in terms of usefulness. > > Except this is what we have now, and isn't a compromise at all. >
What use is a bug report requesting an EAPI bump for no reason? There is no sense in "compromising" and creating such a policy if nobody actually benefits from it.
