Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-misc/openvpn: ChangeLog openvpn-2.1.3.ebuild

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1344 bytes --]

On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 19:08:55 Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
> Excerpts from Mike Frysinger's message of Thu Oct 14 00:32:40 +0200 2010:
> > On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 18:13:18 Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger's message of Wed Oct 13 23:46:43 +0200 2010:
> > > > On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 15:57:17 Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
> > > > > And why putting different tasks into one function?
> > > > 
> > > > for the same reason we dont have separate test binaries: test_exist,
> > > > test_file, test_dir, etc...
> > > > 
> > > > it makes more sense in my mind to combine the functionality.
> > > 
> > > So the only argument for having more complicated, less intuitive and
> > > less readable function is the old 'test' program?  Please, reconsider
> > > my solution with more reason.
> > 
> > we prioritize differently.  i prefer unified code with options.
> 
> In which part it's unified?

the file checking & status accumulation.  extending my code to add more 
options in the future is easier as well.

> As I said it doesn't conform much to 'test' convention.

sure it does

this thread is going nowhere.  i believe my proposal is the way to go, and we 
arent arguing over anything of too much value (i.e. bike shedding).  no one 
else has an opinion, so ive gone my route.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]