Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] man/ebuild.5: Update description of =* operator.

[Brian Dolbec]

On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 05:04:57 +0000 (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:

> Brian Dolbec posted on Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:09:06 -0700 as excerpted:
>
> > On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:45:38 +0200 Alexander Berntsen
> > <bernalex@g.o> wrote:
> >
> >> On 22/09/15 16:27, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> >> > But, I wonder if the change had a bug side effect...causing him
> >> > the grief
> >> It appears the "problem" is that he can't exploit an old bug. So
> >> it's actually the opposite.
> >>
> > hey, I'm still waking up ;)  I went over the previous emails/patch.
> > Yeah, I see it clearly now.  He was splitting the date suffix,
> > which the whole date is considered as one boundary zone.
>
> Second hand as I don't do IRC (tho the date string example was
> specifically mentioned on the big dev thread a couple times, and I
> was as a result surprised to see the "bug fix" here without so much
> as a mention that if the date string thing worked it was only by
> accident, as it was always exploiting a bug...)
>
> But as a workaround, has anyone suggested the obvious... 2015.0922 ?
>
> I find 2015.0922 visually easier to parse than 20150922, in any case,
> and in fact routinely do break it down into four-digit substrings
> here, as extensions for dated backups of various critical config
> files, etc.
>


No, as portage developers we were too busy looking over our shoulders
watching out for the pitch-fork and torches wielding angry mob, because
we fixed a bug... ;)   which turns out only seems to have affected one
developer/user and 2 ebuilds.  But the thought did cross my mind
earlier today.  And seeing it here now, yes, I agree it does look
better and easier to read.  But as a long used form, the old/existing
method will likely be hard to to get devs to convert to the split form.
-- 
Brian Dolbec <dolsen>