On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:16 PM David Seifert <[email protected]> wrote: > Given that there are no ebuilds in the tree using this eclass and being > in EAPI 0, 1 or 2 ( > https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/eapi-per-eclass/savedconfig.eclass/ > ), wouldn't it make more sense to just whitelist EAPI >= 4 and clean up > this backwards compatibility cruft instead?
I'm fixing a bug with the least invasive change possible. I'm not trying to rework the eclass.
