| 1 |
Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
> All this is to say that "easy to read" is in the eye of the beholder. |
| 3 |
> For ebuilds in the tree, the beholder is usually the maintainer, which |
| 4 |
> is why I think the choice should be left up to him. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I think what mgorny says is that locality of ebuilds is an important factor. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Our ebuilds are bash programs, and in source code, "as little |
| 10 |
> duplication as possible" is a strong contributor to "easy to read." |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Here's an idea: Could a little bit of automated (but obviously checked!) |
| 13 |
de-duplication be made [an optional] part of adding an ebuild into the |
| 14 |
tree, and please everyone? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
//Peter |
Archives