| 1 |
Alistair Bush wrote: |
| 2 |
> I just don't think those numbers tell us anything and that should be |
| 3 |
> obvious from anyone who has read GLEP 55[1], we ain't really attempting |
| 4 |
> to solve a problem that exists within the tree currently (well the bash |
| 5 |
> issue does, in a way ). We are trying to solve issues that ware stopping |
| 6 |
> the "tree" moving forward. Lets evaluate GLEP 55 in the problems it is |
| 7 |
> attempting to solve. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I'm afraid you missed the whole point... |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
- what is in the proposal is a solution looking for a problem: nobody |
| 12 |
updated the glep with the required sections, nobody put up a list of |
| 13 |
bugs/rfe from bugzilla it helps to solve. Vague "leading to the future |
| 14 |
change" declaration aren't what I'd expect. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
- Assuming there is an actual reason to move forward (by digging |
| 17 |
bugzilla yourself or deciding to do so as academic exercise) you could |
| 18 |
think about the problem and its solutions (my the email starting this |
| 19 |
thread on dev) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
- Given all you need is just to have a way to get the information about |
| 22 |
EAPI before you actually parse the ebuild since the eapi defines how you |
| 23 |
parse it, you can come up with various solutions, the simplest being |
| 24 |
first extract the eapi, being it in a fixed place, and then do the parse. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
- Extracting such information could have different costs depending on |
| 27 |
where to place it. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
- I started to check if the proposal about having the fixed position as |
| 30 |
the end of the filename is really much more viable than having it at the |
| 31 |
top of the file. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
lu |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Luca Barbato |
| 39 |
Gentoo Council Member |
| 40 |
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
| 41 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
Archives