| 1 |
Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Let's try something new. I would like to get opinions from as many |
| 3 |
> people as possible about GLEP 55 and alternatives listed here in order |
| 4 |
> to get some idea what the general developer pool thinks. Everyone is |
| 5 |
> only allowed to post a single reply to this thread in order to make it |
| 6 |
> easy to read through. The existing thread should be used for actual |
| 7 |
> discussion about the GLEP and the alternatives. This should be a useful |
| 8 |
> experiment to see if we can control ourselves :) |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> My notes so far: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> 1) Status quo |
| 13 |
> - does not allow changing inherit |
| 14 |
> - bash version in global scope |
| 15 |
> - global scope in general is quite locked down |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> 3) EAPI in locked down place in the ebuild |
| 18 |
> - Allows changing global scope |
| 19 |
> - EAPI can't be changed in an existing ebuild so the PM can trust |
| 20 |
> the value in the cache |
| 21 |
> - Does not allow changing versioning rules unless version becomes a |
| 22 |
> normal metadata variable |
| 23 |
> * Needs more accesses to cache as now you don't have to load older |
| 24 |
> versions if the latest is not masked |
| 25 |
> a) <new extension> |
| 26 |
> b) new subdirectory like ebuilds/ |
| 27 |
> - we could drop extension all together so don't have to argue about |
| 28 |
> it any more |
| 29 |
> - more directory reads to get the list of ebuilds in a repository |
| 30 |
> c) .ebuild in current directory |
| 31 |
> - needs one year wait |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Leave EAPI inside the ebuild. That's where I want to find it. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Oh, and as others have mentioned, CVS sucks for file renaming and |
| 36 |
versions. Yet another reason to leave it inside the ebuild. |
Archives