On 10/17/2015 02:56 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:49 AM, hasufell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The other feature that is supposed to be in EAPI6 (I didn't read the >>> draft yet) is that the PM should refuse to install the package if >>> eapply is never called (ie src_prepare is overridden and the ebuild >>> didn't call eapply). It is required that all ebuilds call it once >>> unconditionally. That way users don't get inconsistent behavior from >>> package to package and be dependent on maintainers to fix it. >>> >> >> I hope that "feature" doesn't make it into EAPI6. >> > > The council already voted it in, but of course the final spec requires > approval. I don't intend to approve it without it, unless somebody > makes a REALLY good case for it. > > Why wouldn't you want this, anyway? You're advocating for having the > PM do it 100% of the time, and simultaneously arguing that if it is > done via a call in the ebuild it shouldn't be 100% consistent. Those > positions do not seem consistent, unless you just want EAPI6 to be > broken so that you can argue for EAPI7 or whatever. >
Nah. I'm just saying it isn't as useful as you think it is. Bothering maintainers with such fatal warnings is just a minor nuisance.
