On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:53:18 +0200 Pacho Ramos <[email protected]> wrote:
> Seriously, what people is still having problems with handling eapi4? > If there are doubts about its usage, they should be asked and resolved > instead of ignored keeping ebuilds with older eapis. The only eapi > that probably adds no advantage for a lot of ebuilds is eapi3, but > that is not the case for eapi4 for example, that includes changes > that should be incorporated by most packages in the tree, some of > them introduced by it and others inherited from older eapis. > > What is the advantage of using eapi2 over eapi4 for example? What > "hard to learn" change was included in eapi4 over eapi2? Were you around when eapi2 got out and we had a bunch of packages running econf twice because we wanted to quickly get rid of built_with_use? A 5 mins fix is a 5 mins fix, if you include an eapi bump in those 5 mins then i expect crap to be committed to the tree or nothing at all.
