Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:08:23 +0100
> Uh, your benchmarks are nonsense.

Provide your nonsensical ones.

> That is not how metadata checks work.

Explain how they work, regen works that way...

> By parsing the ebuilds you're talking doubling the number of file reads
> required to get the job done, and massively increasing the number of
> seeks required.

Apparently it doesn't impact anything.

> But that isn't even the main issue. The main issue is that even if you
> retroactively pretend that all ebuilds are in a format they're not, and
> ignore the breakage, and then wait for a year for package managers to
> try to parse your new format, you *still* can't change name or
> versioning rules.

why? when portage would breanch if I put an ebuild with a wacky version 
AND there is a valid cache for that telling its eapi 99 ?

> Again, these are all things that have been discussed at length
> previously. Please either come up with a legitimate technical
> objection, or admit that you've seen the light.

the glep doesn't show any of those nor reference to it, as I said 
before, do your homework and probably more people will be happier with 
your proposals.

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero