| 1 |
2009/5/17 Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o>: |
| 2 |
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:17:57 +0200 |
| 4 |
>> Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> 2. "Add new global scope functions in any sane way" |
| 6 |
>>> This is a valid use case, as seen by the eapi-2 update. But the way |
| 7 |
>>> this is currently handled by portage (advising to upgrade the package |
| 8 |
>>> manager) works. So I don't see a need to change the file extension for |
| 9 |
>>> this reason. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> It means we can't start using those new global scope functions until |
| 12 |
>> we're sure that everyone's going to be upgraded, because users get |
| 13 |
>> extremely upset if they start seeing that kind of message. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Isn't that a given anyway? I think the way eapi-2 was introduced into |
| 16 |
> the tree wasn't particularly problematic. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I think there might be a misunderstanding here. Ciaran means functions |
| 19 |
provided by the package manager that ebuilds can call during metadata |
| 20 |
generation, for example built-in versionator-like functionality, not |
| 21 |
new phase functions like src_prepare and src_configure. |
Archives