> On 19 Oct 2021, at 00:24, Francesco Riosa <viv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry but portage is too strictly related to the ebuilds in tree, recent 
> removal of EAPI=5 from most eclasses underlined that.
> Or to put id differently if you want a LTS portage you also need a certain 
> number of "protected" eclasses and ebuilds
> It seems a lot of (very appreciated but don't count on me) work

FWIW, I don't think it'd be a big deal to just agree that we wouldn't rip out 
old EAPI support from eclasses
and also slow down with adopting new EAPIs for ebuilds (which there's vague 
consensus about wrt EAPI 8
being done a bit too quickly anyway).

i.e. I don't think this is really a blocker.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Reply via email to