| 1 |
В Чтв, 12/02/2009 в 18:03 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh пишет: |
| 2 |
> GLEP 55 *is* the good, workable solution. There still haven't been |
| 3 |
> legitimate any technical objections to it. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
This issue was discussed already... [1] |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
If you and think that EAPI is meta-information then it should not be |
| 8 |
inside file name and then it's possible to parse ebuild and get EAPI |
| 9 |
from some defined-format line. Performance penalties can be mitigated by |
| 10 |
some new caching (you know better than me that it's good idea to |
| 11 |
re-implement caching in any case). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If it's not meta-information and can be put inside file name, then put |
| 14 |
it differently, not inside extension. It "breaks current package |
| 15 |
managers" is not an argument since it's possible to change format now |
| 16 |
and we'll have this feature later. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
We are already discussing this feature more than year. Many people |
| 19 |
voiced concerns about .eapi extension so why don't you try fix same |
| 20 |
issue differently? Yes it's harder and probably longer but I don't |
| 21 |
believe it's impossible. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
[1] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_95f3b65a36aaa5aa9635a7f8cb1b7592.xml |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Peter. |
Archives