Re: [gentoo-dev] The fallacies of GLEP55

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

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2139 bytes --]

On Sat, 16 May 2009 19:13:21 +0200
Tobias Klausmann <klausman@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Then you include those in your static list not using patterns that
> > deals with them.
> 
> I'm unable to parse this sentence. 

If you're writing a tool that deals with ebuilds, you should have a
list of EAPIs and their associated file extensions. Any EAPI you don't
explicitly support must be ignored as much as possible.

> > Not a problem. We used .kdebuild-1 rather than .ebuild-kdebuild-1
> > for kdebuild, for example.
> 
> Which makes the whole thing more obscure. Are those templates for
> proper Ebuilds? Or maybe something KDE invented and accidentally
> chose a strange name for? The kdebuild example is of limited use:
> very few people outside the original project ever got in contact
> with it. That does not hold true for good ol' ebuilds. As such,
> the confusiong by the ever-mutation file extension would be much
> broader if we did that to the classic portage tree and overlays.

The kdebuild-1 project was extremely useful in testing out ideas and
driving progress forward. We couldn't have used a regular EAPI number
there for obvious reasons, hence the name.

> > You shouldn't be writing anything that even tries to look at any
> > EAPI you don't support. You should be using a static list of file
> > extensions, not a pattern.
> 
> Not every piece of code dealing with ebuilds does care about EAPI
> /at all/.

But that's not the case, since you don't know anything about EAPIs you
don't recognise.

> And it needn't. There is just no way I can do this with
> your proposal:
> 
> 	find /usr/local/portage -iname foobar\*ebuild -print

You should ask your package manager to give you the information you
require.

> And I don't pretend that I know a way to ensure that the change
> will be easy. So I advocate *not* going out of our way to comfort
> that possible Mother of All Changes.

This isn't some hypothetical possible change thing. We already know a
whole bunch of things that need a change, and it's highly likely we'll
discover more later on.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]