From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M5McJ-0000dW-54 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 16 May 2009 16:20:07 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C50BCE0414; Sat, 16 May 2009 16:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.155]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B78FE0414 for ; Sat, 16 May 2009 16:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 13so878691fge.14 for ; Sat, 16 May 2009 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT) 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=Pu/+oUVGzjOBKKXrP8oiumcWN8ccbOf3dzFxZ1mC8B4=; b=fi9X/LbmgJV8gY1YvXQ+H9EaMk39nlxQgQ5u+lNQdF5eSwg0TXc4ggfKrry06LxGQE CDqp65VSKEq53fz7/NFDiTct0UWntkD9Usjiv0jL4Z3dAfJLBuBRojlafllI8Ag7XPmI wr5l28PMcvKViAV51OQTzGmOEUgggpcVeeVGM= 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=tGzES8wDyp489C0rB4z9ULsgBqQQZvI8Xwxrey05389P5CyDY4uShaAMmnRD5GQQfP bKn4x+AAO5uFWUqaxbxvSvBVP4O56p7bDjbyh6ew9rNLERpF3Zm+EsKtIJArw121RlyD MChdNddXWdbGfzMmnF+MDXJLNetxM00imowNg= Received: by 10.86.60.15 with SMTP id i15mr5025497fga.5.1242490804792; Sat, 16 May 2009 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowmobile (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d4sm4452876fga.29.2009.05.16.09.20.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 16 May 2009 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 17:19:59 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The fallacies of GLEP55 Message-ID: <20090516171959.6934290c@snowmobile> In-Reply-To: <20090516161558.GA9841@eric.schwarzvogel.de> References: <20090515194329.GA16382@linux1> <20090515204905.54aa6a5c@snowmobile> <20090516092710.GA3221@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <20090516151216.15efc792@snowmobile> <20090516153224.GA4964@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <20090516163421.32935cbc@snowmobile> <20090516154332.GA6646@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <20090516164903.261df865@snowmobile> <20090516155500.GA8506@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <20090516165752.7d0b9fdc@snowmobile> <20090516161558.GA9841@eric.schwarzvogel.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.1; i686-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; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/07.OYL/_6b9H.ZOdWNa+Rt7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 2a770a92-49de-460a-8d47-195e7225ecb0 X-Archives-Hash: bbc8bf14852c027e065fbafd9627d903 --Sig_/07.OYL/_6b9H.ZOdWNa+Rt7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 16 May 2009 18:15:58 +0200 Tobias Klausmann wrote: > On Sat, 16 May 2009, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > Tobias Klausmann wrote: > > > > Yes, those. The current rules include some pointless arbitrary > > > > restrictions that are only there for historical reasons and that > > > > mean people have to mess with convoluted MY_PV things. > > >=20 > > > Still: a sane spec for those plus a sane spec for inside-the-file > > > EAPI specs can be done with/during *one* extension change.=20 > >=20 > > GLEP 55's just one extension change: it moves from .ebuild > > to .ebuild-EAPI. >=20 > So we're not talking about .ebuild-2 for EAPI=3D2, .ebuild-3 for > EAPI=3D3 etc? That would just be silly and it was the first idea I > got when I saw the proposal. Yes, yes we are. That's just one change, from a static string to a pattern for a string. Heck, pretend GLEP 55 says .eapi-X.eb instead if it makes you happy. > Aside from that, one idea that came to me recently was to specify > per tree what kind of files (version-format-wise, EAPI > elsewhere[0]) a PM has to expect. Tree distributors (Gentoo > itself, other similar distros, overlays... ) would be Providing > that information along a similar route as profiles/repo_name. > This would also reduce the amount of mixing and matching version > formats (something undesirable, if you ask me). It would also > make it easier to take a look at historical (snapshots of) > repositories. It also means an end to nice incremental updates. > [0] I see EAPI specification and version-format spec as separate > issues. It's something we can do as an EAPI thing, and by doing so we keep the smooth upgrade path thing. > > > Any further features that mandate a change in filename format? > > > Pile them on.=20 > >=20 > > There probably will be, and we don't know what they all are yet. > > Unfortunately we can't see the future. >=20 > I meant further as in "not discussed yet". Well, I strongly doubt that anyone's already thought of all the useful changes we might want to make in the future, so I don't think proposing a solution that assumes that they have is a good idea. Otherwise, in another year or two we'll just be back to "well we need to change extensions again, but let's just do it as a second one-off thing". --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/07.OYL/_6b9H.ZOdWNa+Rt7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkoO57EACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEGLACg5RFCdkyKreT2tAOkJ9LppC7F s9wAnjTQsjIARgiqPK/e8Ik4HLNCP5u1 =rNnC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/07.OYL/_6b9H.ZOdWNa+Rt7--