1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> ...and there weren't any legitimate technical objections. |
3 |
|
4 |
Beside "it doesn't solve anything". A perfect solution for non existent |
5 |
problems isn't a viable solution. |
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 |
10 |
>> by some new caching (you know better than me that it's good idea to |
11 |
>> re-implement caching in any case). |
12 |
> |
13 |
> The only thing that can parse ebuilds is bash, |
14 |
|
15 |
False. |
16 |
|
17 |
> Because all the alternatives are worse, |
18 |
|
19 |
Disputed and disputable. |
20 |
|
21 |
> and none of the objections to the extension have been technical in |
22 |
> nature. |
23 |
|
24 |
Yet most people do not care. |
25 |
|
26 |
> They've all been "we don't want you to apply anti-mould paint to the |
27 |
> rotting bikeshed because it's only available in brown". |
28 |
|
29 |
And smells bad. |
30 |
|
31 |
You can also replace it when/if is rotting. |
32 |
|
33 |
lu |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
|
37 |
Luca Barbato |
38 |
Gentoo Council Member |
39 |
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
40 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |