| 1 |
If you need eapi in file name what are the technical reasons of putting |
| 2 |
it into file name extension? Why don't you suggest better ebuild name |
| 3 |
like: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
pkg-ver-eapi.ebuild or pkg-eapi-ver.ebuild ? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I remember last time I've asked this genone told me that this is not |
| 8 |
backward compatible. Ok, it's not, but what's the problem to change |
| 9 |
extension once only for this change? Call you new files like |
| 10 |
pkg-ver-eapi.emerge and that's it! What is the need to change extension |
| 11 |
every time you introduce new eapi? Another possibility is to implement |
| 12 |
this new file format and wait another one year before using it instead |
| 13 |
of crapping the tree for years with such eapi-extesions... |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Peter. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives