[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 83: EAPI deprecation
From:       Ulrich Mueller <ulm () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2022-07-31 21:21:39
Message-ID: uv8rdrna4 () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


>>>>> On Sun, 31 Jul 2022, Thomas Bracht Laumann Jespersen wrote:

> Minor language things, on the whole an easy document to read!
>> Motivation
>> ==========
>> 
>> So far, old EAPIs were deprecated by the Gentoo Council in an ad-hoc
>> manner.  No fixed criteria were used, resulting in very different
>> deprecation times after approval of newer EAPIs.  Standardized
>> criteria for deprecation and banning will make the life cycle of EAPIs
>> more predictable.

> "very different" could maybe be specified further. Something like
> "inconsistent"/"unreliable"/"unpredictable" is more precise?

>> 
>> The Gentoo Council will ban a deprecated EAPI when
>> 
>> * 24 months have passed since its deprecation, and
>> * it is used by less than 5 % of ebuilds in the Gentoo repository.

> Should be "fewer than 5 %".

>> 
>> A delay of 24 months between deprecation and ban will give ebuild
>> authors enough time to update.  This is especially relevant for
>> overlays and downstream distributions.  Since a banned EAPI is
>> sufficient reason for updating an ebuild, an additional threshold of
>> 5 % is required, in order to keep the number of such updates (and bug
>> reports requesting them) manageable.

> Two things:

> "Since" has a temporal meaning, but is often used to mean "although". Maybe
> "although" is a better word here?

> I would drop the ", in order" and make it simply "[…] an additional threshold
> of 5% is required to keep the number […]"

Thanks, should be all fixed. Updated version will follow.

Ulrich

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]