1 |
Matti Bickel wrote: |
2 |
> And while your proposal sounds more compliant to the DRY principle, i |
3 |
> would object it on the basis that it makes a single ebuild actually |
4 |
> harder to understand as you have to read (1) eclasses, (2) -base.ebuild |
5 |
> and (3) -version.ebuild. |
6 |
|
7 |
That's quite exactly what I wanted to write - plus this -base.ebuild |
8 |
thingy would only make sense if we also allow versioning of |
9 |
-base.ebuilds. And then we're quickly speaking of package-based eclasses |
10 |
instead of "-base.ebuilds". |
11 |
|
12 |
If we're speaking of a list of whishes for 2009 - i'd prefer to see |
13 |
eclass versioning instead of -base.ebuilds ;) |
14 |
|
15 |
Tobias |