1 |
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:00:32 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> >>>>> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Zac Medico wrote: |
4 |
> > If we do go with a variant of GLEP 55, I'd prefer a variant that |
5 |
> > uses a constant extension (like .eb) and places the EAPI string |
6 |
> > just after the version component of the name. For example: |
7 |
> |
8 |
> > foo-1.0-r1-eapi5.ebuild |
9 |
> |
10 |
> This is so ugly... I guess I'll retire the same day when such an |
11 |
> abomination gets accepted. ;-) |
12 |
> |
13 |
> (Still better than the original variant of GLEP 55 though.) |
14 |
|
15 |
I'm sorry, we're down to "it's ugly and someone already said no and I'll |
16 |
throw my toys out of the pram if I don't get my way" as the arguments |
17 |
against GLEP 55 now? |
18 |
|
19 |
-- |
20 |
Ciaran McCreesh |