On January 6, 2018 8:11:09 PM EST, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>Justin Lecher posted on Sat, 06 Jan 2018 13:23:12 + as excerpted:
>
>> As there are no consumers [1] of the virtualx.eclass using ancient
>EAPIs
>> I dropped support for EAPI=2/3
>>
>> Best,
>> Justin
>>
>> 1)
>https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/eapi-per-eclass/virtualx.eclass/
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/eclass/virtualx.eclass b/eclass/virtualx.eclass
>
>Dropped, past tense, the commit is already made to the tree, or will
>drop
>using that diff, assuming no strong objections here?
>
>Keep in mind that people may still be using it in the overlays even
>when
>it's out of the main tree. That isn't on its own a reason to avoid
>dropping it from the eclass in the tree, but part of the idea of
>posting
>such changes here is to at least warn people maintaining overlays that
>/might/ use it, so they can either port or grab a copy of the eclass
>for
>their overlay before the change.
>
>So that past-tense "dropped", if indeed that's what it was, looks a bit
>
>rude, not giving notice at all. But if it's "dropped in this patch,
>but
>this patch not yet applied, so will drop in the tree when it is",
>carry-
>on with the usual timing, then. =:^)
>
>(My non-scientific observation seems to indicate at least a week of
>notice appears to be the norm, if there's no substantial changes
>suggested or a wait requested. If there's a wait requested, for
>out-of-
>tree I'd say perhaps a month, max, no longer necessary for out-of-tree
>unless you simply want to be extra nice, because if nothing else they
>can
>just grab a copy before the change and if they can't even do /that/ in
>a
>month... . Beyond that and the old version can always be dug out of
>git
>if necessary.)
>
>Either way, thanks for the cleanup. =:^)
You think a distribution should wait a month for changes in order to not break
something that is unsupported? He did give you the diff if you're that
concerned.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
