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 1S7dlx-0006YW-8a for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:17:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 32C1DE0C08; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D7FE0C15 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:16:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0AB251B411A for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:16:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F5FFF61.2090302@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:16:01 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120304 Thunderbird/10.0.1 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] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds References: <4F5A2495.4060305@gentoo.org> <20120309125126.186969f9@gentoo.org> <4F5A28B6.2010404@gentoo.org> <4F5A34A8.4080200@orlitzky.com> <20120309192054.776bcd56@googlemail.com> <4F5B7C1A.6060509@gentoo.org> <20120312015533.GD7579@localhost> <4F5D76B8.5040102@gentoo.org> <20120312083612.GF7579@localhost> <4F5E1EC6.3050508@gentoo.org> <20120314020127.GB7731@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20120314020127.GB7731@localhost> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 246563f9-feb8-4315-aefd-44e9cbab39ff X-Archives-Hash: f0437fde91b44ec4e84b772d35c314de On 03/13/2012 07:01 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > With respect; you're proposing we go gum up version parsing via > shoving EAPI directly into it. Literally, make what is already a > complex mess, worse. Apply some KISS to your proposal please. ;) > > Just hammering the point home; compatibility *is* complex. Claiming > otherwise is naive. Case in point: your proposal breaks the shit out > of any current-day package manager that saw such a filename. I'm not really interested in GLEP 55 or variants of it. I was just saying that if we do go with a GLEP 55 variant, then I'd prefer one that's similar to the "EAPI in the filename with one-time extension change" option [1]. There are plenty of ways to do that without making it difficult to separate the EAPI from the version part. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0055.html#eapi-in-the-filename-with-one-time-extension-change -- Thanks, Zac