Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:47:07 -0500
> Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
>> It seems like we could be up to ebuild-kde4-3.2 in six months.
> 
> Why on earth do people think that? Of all the crazy being thrown
> around, this is the only one wearing a tutu.
> 

I suppose I'm exaggerating a little deliberately to make a point.  It 
isn't so much that I don't think that people designing the extensions 
won't use sense, but that we're still potentially facing multiple new 
file extensions per year.  Maybe not 15, but certainly 1-3.  That can 
add up fast.  If we had been doing this all along then we'd probably 
expect there to be upwards of 10-20 file extensions in portage today.

It just seems like it isn't the best solution.  You can get the same 
effect by just sticking something in a comment line a few lines into the 
ebuild in a fixed position.  Sure, the file might need to be read twice, 
but unless the reading takes place widely separated in time the file is 
going to be in the cache the second time around.  With proper caching 
you only need to scan files that have changed - we can't have that many 
daily commits, can we?

I'll probably refrain from commenting further - I trust the council to 
weigh all the options and go with whatever makes the most sense. 
However, I did want to make it clear that I don't think that the folks 
advocating this approach are out to release 47 EAPI releases per year or 
anything...