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

  • Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0083: New section "Support for EAPIs by p

    From Eli Schwartz@21:1/5 to konsolebox on Thu Jun 26 07:30:01 2025
    This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --------------UnfB0hOYafDIr02oJHtVgjot
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    On 6/25/25 11:54 PM, konsolebox wrote:
    On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 1:34 AM Ulrich Müller <[email protected]> wrote:
    +Conversely, removing support for an EAPI from the package manager can
    +be disruptive for users. Unofficial overlays and private repositories
    +often continue using older EAPIs long after their removal from the
    +main tree. Therefore, the timeline for dropping package-manager
    +support is more generous than that for use of EAPIs in repositories.

    What's the point of these supposedly generous long-term support for
    old EAPIs when you're dropping support for them in eclasses like distutils-r1? It's all silly and pointless.

    Yes I've heard there's no obligation for eclass maintainers to support
    old EAPIs. Same point applies. You might as well tell overlay owners
    to not use ::gentoo's eclasses so these supposedly "long-term" support
    become sensible.


    Precisely because overlay owners sometimes wish to do so -- and one
    thing they CANNOT replace in their overlay, is /usr/bin/emerge. But they
    could, if they wished, copy eclasses and restore older EAPIs in their
    copy. Or package tons of software that use Autotools to build C code and
    have no need of eclasses.

    This thread isn't really a good place to come in with a chip on your
    shoulder about Gentoo Python.


    --
    Eli Schwartz

    --------------UnfB0hOYafDIr02oJHtVgjot--

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

    wnsEABYIACMWIQTnFNnmK0TPZHnXm3qEp9ErcA0vVwUCaFzYUQUDAAAAAAAKCRCEp9ErcA0vVwEl AQDL8KtQFtaFzXQw8jpZB1mSYd+ICBqdoMWpyuTBQ2TEvQEA7rXP8EEgyLVGPQc6VJ+nvJ8VeJ8f /vpkdssnJFAgpws=
    =8l0G
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sam James@21:1/5 to konsolebox on Thu Jun 26 15:50:01 2025
    konsolebox <[email protected]> writes:

    On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 1:34 AM Ulrich Müller <[email protected]> wrote:
    +Conversely, removing support for an EAPI from the package manager can
    +be disruptive for users. Unofficial overlays and private repositories
    +often continue using older EAPIs long after their removal from the
    +main tree. Therefore, the timeline for dropping package-manager
    +support is more generous than that for use of EAPIs in repositories.

    What's the point of these supposedly generous long-term support for
    old EAPIs when you're dropping support for them in eclasses like distutils-r1? It's all silly and pointless.

    Yes I've heard there's no obligation for eclass maintainers to support
    old EAPIs. Same point applies. You might as well tell overlay owners
    to not use ::gentoo's eclasses so these supposedly "long-term" support
    become sensible.

    In addition to Eli's reply, I'd also say:
    * Please moderate your tone.
    * This is an issue I care about (and we've been discussing), and changes
    like this (and the other one wrt EAPI support/deprecation/banning in
    ::gentoo) are really prerequisites for a better policy on eclass EAPI support.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?utf-8?Q?Ulrich_M=C3=BCller?=@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 26 18:30:01 2025
    On Thu, 26 Jun 2025, konsolebox wrote:

    +Conversely, removing support for an EAPI from the package manager can
    +be disruptive for users. Unofficial overlays and private repositories
    +often continue using older EAPIs long after their removal from the
    +main tree. Therefore, the timeline for dropping package-manager
    +support is more generous than that for use of EAPIs in repositories.

    What's the point of these supposedly generous long-term support for
    old EAPIs when you're dropping support for them in eclasses like distutils-r1? It's all silly and pointless.

    Yes I've heard there's no obligation for eclass maintainers to support
    old EAPIs. Same point applies. You might as well tell overlay owners
    to not use ::gentoo's eclasses so these supposedly "long-term" support
    become sensible.

    I'd suggest treating EAPI support in eclasses as a separate discussion.

    Let's not conflate it with EAPI support in package managers, which is
    the scope of this GLEP change. (And arguably, support by package
    managers is a prerequisite of _any_ long-term support.)

    Ulrich

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

    iQFDBAEBCAAtFiEEtDnZ1O9xIP68rzDbUYgzUIhBXi4FAmhddIwPHHVsbUBnZW50 b28ub3JnAAoJEFGIM1CIQV4uvtIH/1/5JitkKEC6qMcpbdx5A9+vjct7vNh8+X7u napUGetcn+XPv6yjA46sEXsoBaCwk1Ugz4P7J0hrWJS6MdEzPHZ4D9EaopLpRcKe Gx32oz+7sA10j+i2BgpKxTBR+kp1VvJjHRarqqchQyTqsEKBKymKXWnOQ2Of58X+ i6ukogsqtaqth+G7ie9uLKVMQRu3FNqd4ESgRhQwuSuOsLPOrXMNZ6grxXqm99q0 fps8ZomqUuU61aOU4+IGHN45l1YCqDShpT3ojBBeq2hAQQ7kHehldC86a2ZUbYlN sTGMKC8zaMNFwqqSmwfsbbLXH3ypjKuqXIMPB8sAEOOTc/nl8v4=
    =lKJm
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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