1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.GENTOO.DEV

  • Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 00/50] XXXXXX.eclass: drop support for EAPI6

    From Robin H. Johnson@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 27 23:10:01 2024
    There wasn't an introduction message to this series, but I wanted to
    raise the discussion.

    We only JUST got rid of the last EAPI6 ebuilds in the main tree.

    There are overlays that still have EAPI6 ebuilds - and depend on these
    ebuilds.

    When is an expected time for all of those ebuilds to migrate, and how is
    that being communicated?

    --
    Robin Hugh Johnson
    Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation President & Treasurer
    E-Mail : [email protected]
    GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
    GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v2
    Comment: Robbat2 @ Orbis-Terrarum Networks - The text below is a digital signature. If it doesn't make any sense to you, ignore it.

    iQKTBAABCgB9FiEEveu2pS8Vb98xaNkRGTlfI8WIJsQFAmbOPxhfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJE RUJCNkE1MkYxNTZGREYzMTY4RDkxMTE5Mzk1RjIzQzU4ODI2QzQACgkQGTlfI8WI JsREvBAAjCou3wZmzw+NTNWu0c4bXZ8FeEQoY4y+RZ59MPp30Wv5R8NNAy0G8T60 P8+pWMnwxFAzvp+AMj/NnPMEOXIx79yqVLHXV/FKahuaRhSo6JIYPgvBFm46B4Jj oJRpIN0ZK/dhBaNqZrCnEzaaK+yIdtHA/ldKgMzi+rXgNj0R+AgboMTdx9aWEYYe Lo5w4hVozSTSCHC+HmWHzk0ZYK06GaZKanbqalppbb6skLFYmH61ERHdB12atVdC XbyR+zxgJCrBQfKYrm3u+FoC33VhHXPkPXG/9QotDOIAT8Pn2BhfpgBRzhhfNmyJ 3u2LVu2Kpwat6MHFPUty8REfPirakJ6OxNIeinsYAf099E/kVpoC9yDzDEUQvyii
    9t0u4oSb
  • From Eli Schwartz@21:1/5 to Robin H. Johnson on Tue Aug 27 23:20:01 2024
    This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --------------k1V5ziwFNMvUb00EklmuNqbA
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    On 8/27/24 5:03 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
    There wasn't an introduction message to this series, but I wanted to
    raise the discussion.

    We only JUST got rid of the last EAPI6 ebuilds in the main tree.

    There are overlays that still have EAPI6 ebuilds - and depend on these ebuilds.

    When is an expected time for all of those ebuilds to migrate, and how is
    that being communicated?


    If we were removing an eclass that only supports EAPI 6 and is being
    dropped because it's useless, we'd last rite it and give people 30 days
    to move.

    But because the *file* isn't being removed, there is no rule how to do
    it apparently?? :D The obvious answer here is to stick an ewarn in the
    "if EAPI 6" branch at global scope.


    (It's a bit messy when doing dependency calculation. This too is a
    feature, if you think about it.)


    --
    Eli Schwartz


    --------------k1V5ziwFNMvUb00EklmuNqbA--

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    wnsEABYIACMWIQTnFNnmK0TPZHnXm3qEp9ErcA0vVwUCZs5CEwUDAAAAAAAKCRCEp9ErcA0vV+Mz AP4mt7kQ8pGAiTAq+fWMss6dvPS+E2qOZtpudb3+6hVTJQEAyjnxmi+3NMP96ZrxekQo+zE5g9uj fWJIT6FUAb4cfwI=
    =vJuK
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sam James@21:1/5 to Eli Schwartz on Tue Aug 27 23:40:01 2024
    Eli Schwartz <[email protected]> writes:

    On 8/27/24 5:03 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
    There wasn't an introduction message to this series, but I wanted to
    raise the discussion.

    We only JUST got rid of the last EAPI6 ebuilds in the main tree.

    There are overlays that still have EAPI6 ebuilds - and depend on these
    ebuilds.

    When is an expected time for all of those ebuilds to migrate, and how is
    that being communicated?


    If we were removing an eclass that only supports EAPI 6 and is being
    dropped because it's useless, we'd last rite it and give people 30 days
    to move.

    But because the *file* isn't being removed, there is no rule how to do
    it apparently?? :D The obvious answer here is to stick an ewarn in the
    "if EAPI 6" branch at global scope.


    (It's a bit messy when doing dependency calculation. This too is a
    feature, if you think about it.)

    Yes, it's something which has bothered me for a while. When we ratified
    GLEP 83 [0], I wanted to come back to it for handling EAPI support
    deprecation in "important" eclasses but I couldn't figure out a nice
    definition for that and got distracted.

    I actually *do* think we should do something here, but I will note
    pkgcheck will have been warning about use of DeprecatedEapi at least.

    [0] https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0083.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ulrich Mueller@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 28 11:50:01 2024
    On Tue, 27 Aug 2024, Robin H Johnson wrote:

    We only JUST got rid of the last EAPI6 ebuilds in the main tree.

    Note that the council deprecated EAPI 6 on 2021-07-11 and banned it
    on 2023-07-11.

    There are overlays that still have EAPI6 ebuilds - and depend on these ebuilds.

    When is an expected time for all of those ebuilds to migrate, and how
    is that being communicated?

    I'd argue that the migration period started with the deprecation
    of EAPI 6, i.e. more than three years ago.

    [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Package_Manager_Specification#Council_approval_and_use_in_Gentoo_repository

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQFDBAEBCAAtFiEEtDnZ1O9xIP68rzDbUYgzUIhBXi4FAmbO8bsPHHVsbUBnZW50 b28ub3JnAAoJEFGIM1CIQV4uwlUH/RWK38VnNFckj25zOH37XA77BxSd92TpXvU9 K+BEl8zrc7OrkioQHMTbeC59gPHE5ExdeFmV9fNfnP6KdJOHLqtgqNuS4L1VAd/n iPfS+rg+fxLWnMZnYpfe+TJzmAgK4zLa9pqYs4hS/FsyPRv4tBy/du0aYK6fzniu KhOlrOXKaocs+1OKZPfw4ZUwcae08r9GmRU4IHSvpBF/W/lM99CKNonpvNH4m/QL WBR0AEB+mVne51xW71Sl+W85h76LTx74D9o9UktDtvqEUJqb672KJqmnu4m268k6 NqiDm4ThDfYOgj/PuiI1Pxns0J+Plt7V9tEXZRcxpJSSh9eqoOQ=
    =WPzg
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)