I DO understand.
You don't. The complete paragraph of yours shows you don't.
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.
Yes, indeed. They're not happy with it. That's about all most participants here have stated so far. There are two or three valid *technical* concerns and all the rest is basically noise.
There seem to be less people opposed to having that ebuild format restriction.
If this was only about the ebuild format restriction, I wouldn't even bother to write a single mail on this subject. It's much more important than that - the suggested GLEP would allow us to make use of new EAPI features much earlier than now and without causing major problems, I think.
Just this morning when I was reading my backlog in #-dev, I saw a discussion between between two devs that culminated in the following:
a> "So we can make use of this feature in about a year?" b> "Yeah."Are we Debian now? A new feature gets implemented (obviously because we *need* it) and we can make use of it in a *year*?
So either choose the one that's accepted by the majority
The majority of devs doesn't even read here (not to speak of active participation).
-- Best regards, Wulf
pgpZtv993UOWc.pgp
Description: PGP Digital Signature
