1 |
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 08:15:11AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
2 |
> They may or may not have issues. Our goal is to minimize our |
3 |
> vulnerability to these kinds of issues as much as possible. Being able |
4 |
> to obtain the ebuild EAPI without the expense of sourcing it is one |
5 |
> small step toward this goal. |
6 |
|
7 |
EAPI is metadata and is best treated as such. In other words, history |
8 |
aside, it does not belong inside an ebuild. Making EAPI info part of |
9 |
the filename does look like a reasonable solution - similar to |
10 |
seen/replied flags in the filenames in maildir directories. Heck, even |
11 |
version numbers in an ebuild filename is similar. |
12 |
|
13 |
I don't understand why there is a strong objection to it. |
14 |
|
15 |
But anyway, it is Friday night and I am out of here. Have fun. |
16 |
|
17 |
-- |
18 |
Eray Aslan <eras@g.o> |