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 ) id 1Lc4kG-0000Jv-1E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:23:16 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D555DE05C7; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f157.google.com (mail-bw0-f157.google.com [209.85.218.157]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 763D3E05C7 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz1 with SMTP id 1so6049152bwz.10 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:23:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=iLINho+myA2RVhuletnidJ3ovQaRypJlYk5rMJCufIM=; b=oUuZFO6pn/ndY9D8x/fHa3gtCqbK5108zqCJ/e45zUXXQhl/qdbR6RCv+pvtBrfZO+ zqUwvaLMTcWG69BEo5s+1uqArVAe/AAMaRGj+scekZKZuUk/nULs4A/olu55F94avgSC ldwMx59cRYQ/+mpUBAh5RdVPP05RTG3Bil/0k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=JADe0SKEcBqm0YBVjuE3u4CWvuZ5pGg7QDi4p7BszHxoRTzbrSqY4PNJXiXrluO2Cl uxXaShcdHFGUACT0lKYWCFKQmj6IO0pWhds3lgwwfcnONeGEhZWqJxrCl/RP5RMkp5e3 3pojh3WE+D9ozWZRd1p5H2ebBzqy7v3lDTL4o= Received: by 10.86.60.14 with SMTP id i14mr50148fga.70.1235510593160; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:23:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from snowcone (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u1sm11870711uge.2.2009.02.24.13.23.12 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:23:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:23:04 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) Message-ID: <20090224212304.56aaf04e@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <1235510283.3839.4@spike> References: <20090224164812.3795d777@snowcone> <1235510283.3839.4@spike> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/1ngjSD054gyE6em5llaqcTN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 2f4badd7-f5f3-4b62-9ae8-b0484ac544a5 X-Archives-Hash: 8c8dca7822349b06035ca2544ede33ba --Sig_/1ngjSD054gyE6em5llaqcTN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:17:57 +0000 Roy Bamford wrote: > > PN and PV are metadata, same as EAPI. > > So we made a mistake with PN and PV and may compound it with EAPI. > How long before we *must* have other pieces of information in the=20 > filename? Uh, never. > When will the filename get so long as to become unwhieldy ? Uh, never. > Lets fix it properly now since it will be much more painful to put an=20 > extendable solution in place later. 55 is the fix. > It reminds me of other hacks in the history of the PC which we would > do well not to repeat. > e.g. the MSDOS Partition Table, the Extended Partition, the High > Memory Area. =20 Except that once we have EAPI in the file extension, we can change anything we want in arbitrary ways without having to worry about backwards compatibility, so we won't need silly hacks. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/1ngjSD054gyE6em5llaqcTN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmkZTsACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHJuwCeP7mBuhoXYDFkcyadnQKrlHUi mGoAn04hUdETvQnIX3eAqqyFc+x1K1qA =3sOc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/1ngjSD054gyE6em5llaqcTN--