From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-32564-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1KaASw-0003yn-6u
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 14:33:14 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A4BAE0391;
	Mon,  1 Sep 2008 14:33:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9BCDE0391
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon,  1 Sep 2008 14:33:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.33] (unknown [77.246.104.171])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78F56B49EB
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon,  1 Sep 2008 14:33:08 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: [RFC] What features should be
	included in EAPI 2?
From: Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <b41005390808211926i6dff4557q93d32a06f1e7146d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <48A298D9.3030402@gentoo.org>
	 <20080813130329.0fe55b90@googlemail.com> <g8e9uu$mhq$1@ger.gmane.org>
	 <82dd739f0808190545u3cb1632fj3590a6b130dd304a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <48AB0A6D.6050705@gentoo.org> <20080819191804.19c67b0a@googlemail.com>
	 <g8faf8$h6g$1@ger.gmane.org> <20080819214353.1fd55c04@googlemail.com>
	 <g8k257$m7n$1@ger.gmane.org>
	 <b41005390808211926i6dff4557q93d32a06f1e7146d@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:31:25 +0400
Message-Id: <1220279485.6005.22.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 10a70545-5125-4dbb-bfec-7a057eec56c9
X-Archives-Hash: aabd0bac5e629a8d98ef7f490d3e4f72

=D0=92 =D0=A7=D1=82=D0=B2, 21/08/2008 =D0=B2 19:26 -0700, Alec Warner =D0=
=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> src_prepare is a logically distinct action (maybe if we called it
> src_patch it would be clearer?)

We are not only patching sources there but modify them by other means
too (like sed or find .. rm \{\};). So src_prepare is the name which
better reflects intention.

=D0=92 =D0=92=D1=82=D1=80, 19/08/2008 =D0=B2 12:12 +0100, Steve Long =D0=BF=
=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> Besides saving one line of typing, what is the benefit of adding this
> new phase?

Although this disagreement is already closed I'd like to point that
sometimes it's more than one line:

http://overlays.gentoo.org/dev/pva/browser/x11-apps/gxneur/gxneur-0.9.0_p=
106.ebuild

Also... well Ryan already made the point I was going to write. :)

--=20
Peter.