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 1M92NO-0007gY-Hu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:31:54 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 83FB2E0521; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:31:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp03.tky.fi (smtp03.tky.fi [82.130.63.73]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 39061E0521 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:31:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.217] ([82.130.46.217]) by smtp03.tky.fi (SMSSMTP 4.1.9.35) with SMTP id M2009052622315221892 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 22:31:52 +0300 Message-ID: <4A1C43A5.7040704@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 22:31:49 +0300 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090324 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC:sys-apps/portage @overlay atoms postfix support References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: url=http://users.tkk.fi/~praty/public.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig76A9B53F17663244AA043C5A" X-Archives-Salt: f2e27159-8678-4e29-9f2c-271ad7f1e354 X-Archives-Hash: 05fe2a6db247985c2af9b08e57994ad0 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig76A9B53F17663244AA043C5A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable lxnay@sabayonlinux.org wrote: > So, "::" vs "@" apart, is it something that is worth looking and > implementing in future EAPIs? >=20 I don't see the main tree referring to other repositories any time soon so this is not a pressing issue. But as said earlier this makes sense for /etc/portage stuff so there going forward seems prudent. I suggest using "::" as it's more established in these circles. Regards, Petteri --------------enig76A9B53F17663244AA043C5A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkocQ6UACgkQcxLzpIGCsLRWNgCdEDRrdd7vgIJbXcIEwS3B5GTd NLAAn3uKpDuZ7bOLTGvwgaI7oL+xJEJ3 =L2ja -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig76A9B53F17663244AA043C5A--