| 1 |
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 07:17:31PM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> >>>>> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:00:32 +0100 |
| 5 |
> > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> >>>>> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 7 |
> >> > If we do go with a variant of GLEP 55, I'd prefer a variant that |
| 8 |
> >> > uses a constant extension (like .eb) and places the EAPI string |
| 9 |
> >> > just after the version component of the name. For example: |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> >> > foo-1.0-r1-eapi5.ebuild |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> This is so ugly... I guess I'll retire the same day when such an |
| 14 |
> >> abomination gets accepted. ;-) |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> > I'm sorry, we're down to "it's ugly and someone already said no and |
| 17 |
> > I'll throw my toys out of the pram if I don't get my way" as the |
| 18 |
> > arguments against GLEP 55 now? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Note the smiley in my posting. And yes, it _is_ ugly. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Worse, it actually makes parsing _worse_ than it already is. What G55 |
| 23 |
had going for it was ease of filtering out unsupported eapi's. |
| 24 |
Literally just filter the readdir results. This behemoth Zac is |
| 25 |
proposing basically requires throwing regex at it, and *is* able to |
| 26 |
be tripped up since eapi's aren't strictly integers (1-prefix, |
| 27 |
4-python, 4-eapi3 if I wanted to intentionally be a dick and break |
| 28 |
likely non-greedy implementations of the regex). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Same angle, embedding it into the version space means that there can |
| 31 |
be conflicts w/ PN. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Basically... embedding it into the versioning like that, besides being |
| 34 |
ugly as all hell, discards the main benefit g55 had- clear |
| 35 |
identification of EAPI. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
It ain't worth it. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
~brian |
Archives