Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

[Thomas de Grenier de Latour <degrenier@easyconnect.fr>]

On 2007/12/19, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:12:24 +0100
> Thomas de Grenier de Latour <degrenier@easyconnect.fr> wrote:
> > You're done as long as ebuilds are written in bash.
> 
> Not even that. What if people decide that rather than writing
> EAPI="blah", "eapi blah" is cleaner? 

Yeah, and file names suffixes won't work anymore as soon as it has 
arbitrarily been decided that prefixes should be used instead, or that
EAPI must disappear because using explicit sets of named features is
better than using names of some particular sets. That rules only holds
as long as they don't change is not an argument, but a truism.

> What if metadata is moved out of the ebuild, as some people started
> doing years ago?

Which metadata's, the ones from the file contents or the ones from the
file name?

Seriously, i still don't see the start of a rational argument in
your objections to an in-contents alternative.
Which lets the subjective disagreement (you prefering to keep bash
syntax unrestricted at the price of encumbered files names, and me
prefering to restrict it on one particular line for keeping clean
"name-version.fixed-extension" files names), for which argumentation
is hopeless too.

-- 
TGL.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list