| 1 |
Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 30 November 2008 14:23:48 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I have a very quick proposal: why don't we move the packages' homepage |
| 4 |
> > in metadata.xml (since it's usually unique for all the versions) and we |
| 5 |
> > get rid of the variable for the next EAPI version? |
| 6 |
> I would rather see something like: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> packagename/metadata.xml |
| 9 |
> packagename/package-base.ebuild |
| 10 |
> packagename/packagename-version.ebuild |
| 11 |
> packagename/Manifest |
| 12 |
> packagename/Changelog |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Correct me if i'm wrong, but this doesn't address the problem with |
| 15 |
multiple versions having multiple homepages. |
| 16 |
I'm with Diego here that this should be *very* rare. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Can somebody verify this? I mean just throw a little shell script on the |
| 19 |
portage tree showing which ebuilds differ in HOMEPAGE but still have the |
| 20 |
same path.. my poor ibook would take too long for such a thing, so |
| 21 |
sorry, no data here. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
And while your proposal sounds more compliant to the DRY principle, i |
| 24 |
would object it on the basis that it makes a single ebuild actually |
| 25 |
harder to understand as you have to read (1) eclasses, (2) -base.ebuild |
| 26 |
and (3) -version.ebuild. |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Regards, Matti Bickel |
| 29 |
Signed/Encrypted email preferred (key 4849EC6C) |
Archives