On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 12:06:59 +0100 Thomas Pani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But you're totally ignoring my point. So once again: You're trying to > *SET* a standard here. There are lots of people telling you that > they're not happy with the proposal to change the ebuild filename > suffix. There seem to be less people opposed to having that ebuild > format restriction. So either choose the one that's accepted by the > majority (and I'm not saying that EAPI=xxx is the one; I'm saying > that we'll have to figure that out), or think of something completely > new.
The ebuild format restriction does not solve the problem at hand. I'm guessing there're lots of people moaning because they think they understand filenames and can therefore comment. Unfortunately, most of those people don't understand the metadata generation process, and therefore can't comment usefully... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
