[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-cluster/pvfs2: ChangeLog pvfs2-2.6.3-r1.ebuild

[Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk>]

Matti Bickel wrote:

> Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> > Mixing 'gt' and 'ge' is a bad idea.
>> >> 
>> >> Just outa curiosity, why?
>> > 
>> > Because it's inconsistent and one generally assumes that people will be
>> > consistent with the way they test numbers. That way you only need to
>> > read the number rather than continually checking every single line to
>> > see how exactly it's tested for.
>> > 
>> I don't see how this is inconsistent either: two tests are needed, so
>> that both patches are only applied for >=2.6.22 and first only if
>> >2.6.20.
> 
> The point is that if you stick to "ge" OR "gt", everyone could just skip
> reading the comparison and focus on the numbers. Will be fixed in the
> next release, along with kernel-2.4 support...
> 
OIC: so the argument was it should be ge 2.6.21 as well? Does that catch all
the same cases?

I must say I find this criticism unusual: if someone were looking at the
ebuild to check the numbers, I would guess it were because something was
going wrong. As such, they would be paying attention to which version they
were on, and what the tests were. I don't see the use-case for limiting
what maintainers can do in such a fashion, but if it makes no difference to
the outcome (ie which cases are covered), i guess it makes sense.


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list