Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009)

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1192 bytes --]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:13:16 +0100
Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Which begs the question: is it really worth allowing it?
> If we only allow constant assignments (which is an implicit
> restriction in the file extension version) then this can be parsed
> easily with grep/tr/awk/etc and can be the magic eapi guessing. Of
> course the tree has to be checked before implementing this and we'll
> have to wait a good amount of time before breaking the current eapi
> bash-parsing but I'm not aware of any eapi proposal that would break
> the current behavior and would be usable in the main tree within a
> reasonable amount of time such that we can't ignore backward
> compatibility.

...and then we have to do the whole thing again every time something
new crops up. EAPI was supposed to solve this, and profile eapi and GLEP
55 finish the job. Repeatedly going back and saying "oh, we have to
wait another year or more again" is unacceptable.

> > In foo.eclass:
> > 
> >     EAPI="3"
> 
> I thought this was prohibited.

It's legal, and people have done it, but it's considered by most people
to be a horrible QA violation.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]