1 |
2010-11-16 00:41:35 Alex Alexander napisaĆ(a): |
2 |
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 07:40:44PM +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: |
3 |
> > Some updates to my suggestion: |
4 |
> > - Files would optionally end with "-${EAPI}" suffix. |
5 |
> > - The following files would be affected: |
6 |
> > package.mask |
7 |
> > package.unmask |
8 |
> > package.keywords |
9 |
> > package.accept_keywords |
10 |
> > package.use |
11 |
> > package.provided |
12 |
> > use.force |
13 |
> > use.mask |
14 |
> > use.unsatisfiable |
15 |
> > package.use.force |
16 |
> > package.use.mask |
17 |
> > package.use.unsatisfiable |
18 |
> > packages |
19 |
> > virtuals |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > (Some of these files aren't documented in PMS.) |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > I would like to suggest that this feature be included in EAPI="4". |
24 |
> > I have a patch, which implements this feature in Portage. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> The council has already decided that a filename suffix is not a |
27 |
> desirable way to fix issues like this. |
28 |
|
29 |
GLEP 55 changes established filename extension, while my proposition affects files, |
30 |
which don't have any common extension. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis |