Piotr Jaroszyński <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:11:20 +0100:
> On Tuesday 18 of December 2007 20:45:44 Duncan wrote: >> How about when we have a dozen or so EAPIs active, several of which >> apply to a specific ebuild? > > Where is this idea of mixing EAPIs coming from? It really doesn't make > much sense. If EAPI is defined as a particular set of features and rules as grouped together under a specific EAPI label (Ciaran's general definition), and is specifically not ordered, as is the case, thus allowing, potentially, multiple EAPIs to evolve in parallel (Grobian's message), as the upthread argues is possible, even likely... And if a particular ebuild uses features from a non-conflicting super-set of several such EAPIs (Ulrich's message) ... Then said ebuild under this GLEP would need labeled with "the lot of 'em." The message to which I replied (Fernando's) asked what's the problem with that, so I provided an example. Now it /was/ extreme -- one would hope it wouldn't ever get quite /that/ bad, but given the context, I guess I agree with Ulrich' comment -- that the resulting filenames could indeed end up rather strange looking. It's certainly something I hadn't thought of until he connected the dots. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
