| 1 |
On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 16:00 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2. Is there some standard naming scheme? Should the new eclass be called, say, |
| 3 |
> gnatbuild2.eclass or gnatbuild-ng.eclass? Of course this only matters if old |
| 4 |
> eclass is there to stay. If not I'll just call the transitory eclass something |
| 5 |
> like gnatbuild-refactor.eclass for the duration of its existence.. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I suggest gnatbuild-r1.eclass, that seems to be the most widely used |
| 8 |
eclass versioning pattern. Some examples: |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
bash-completion.eclass → bash-completion-r1.eclass (2011) |
| 11 |
distutils.eclass → distutils-r1.eclass (2012) |
| 12 |
emboss.eclass → emboss-r1.eclass (2015) |
| 13 |
git.eclass → git-2.eclass (2011) → git-r3.eclass (2013) |
| 14 |
myspell.eclass → myspell-r2.eclass (2012) |
| 15 |
office-ext.eclass → office-ext-r1.eclass (2013) |
| 16 |
python.eclass → python-r1.eclass (2012) |
| 17 |
qt4.eclass → qt4-r2.eclass (2009) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Other patterns: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
java-utils.eclass → java-utils-2.eclass (2006) |
| 22 |
mysql.eclass → mysql-v2.eclass (2011) |
| 23 |
ruby.eclass → ruby-ng.eclass (2009) |
Archives