| 1 |
On Friday 21 December 2007 08:43:43 Richard Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Please don't comment any further until you understand how this whole |
| 4 |
> > thing works. |
| 5 |
> CON: |
| 6 |
> Yet another value to be parsed out of an increasingly-complex filename. |
| 7 |
> Doesn't look pretty :) |
| 8 |
Taste is a matter of opinion. I happen to like eapi-1 in the filename so I |
| 9 |
know a bit about the ebuild before looking through its contents. |
| 10 |
> Makes a low-level detail more visible to users. |
| 11 |
> You can't make a wild change to how EAPIs are specified - since old PMs |
| 12 |
> will expect it to be in the filename in a particular format. |
| 13 |
This isn't a CON, it is actually a PRO because old PMs won't recognize the new |
| 14 |
format and everyone will be happy. (something not so easy with the other |
| 15 |
solutions.) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
2.6.23-gentoo-r3 |
Archives