| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012, Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Is it really so fixed that ".ebuild" will only ever be bash ? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Certainly it would make sense to change the file extension when an |
| 6 |
EAPI will require something different than bash. For example, some |
| 7 |
editors (Emacs and XEmacs at least) recognise the .ebuild extension |
| 8 |
and use corresponding syntax rules. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> If thats the case, then G55 ( or something similar ) is practically |
| 11 |
> guaranteed as soon as we want something non-bash. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
No, you just use a new extension once and you're done. And I guess |
| 14 |
such drastic changes won't happen frequently. In the past 12 years |
| 15 |
there hasn't been a single one. (If they will ever happen, this is a |
| 16 |
pretty academic discussion.) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Ulrich |
Archives