On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:43:43 -0500
Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Please don't comment any further until you understand how this whole
> > thing works.
> 
> I think this is a bit of an unrealistic expectation.  This change
> impacts EVERYBODY - devs, users, etc.  To expect people not to comment
> on it simply because they're not qualified to write a package manager
> is a bit naive.  Like it or not you do need to obtain some kind of
> general agreement before making a change of this magnitude.

What. It's a small change that's only visible to developers and power
users.

> CON:
> Yet another value to be parsed out of an increasingly-complex
> filename. Doesn't look pretty  :)

It'd only increase complexity in any meaningful way if it were part of
the version part of the ebuild. The version part *is* getting pretty
tricky to parse correctly.

> Makes a low-level detail more visible to users.

Users don't see .ebuild files.

> You can't make a wild change to how EAPIs are specified - since old
> PMs will expect it to be in the filename in a particular format.

You can make entirely arbitrary changes to EAPIs with suffixes,
provided only that you don't use either .ebuild
or .ebuild-(any-existing-eapi).

> The other option that seems popular is just continuing with EAPI=1 or
> whatever in the file (likely with a restriction on format that makes
> it parsable without BASH).  I see these pros/cons for this solution:
> 
> CON:
> You can't make a wild change to how EAPIs are specified - since old
> PMs will expect it to be inside the file in a particular format.

Bigger con: it means no non-trivial new EAPIs for a year or more.

Another con: EAPI=foo or EAPI="foo" or export EAPI="foo" or what?

> I think you'd get far more consensus to the latter approach.

Yes, but the latter problem doesn't solve anything, so it doesn't
really matter whether or not people like it -- it's utterly pointless.

Counting pros and cons is a bad idea -- a single con can make an idea
completely worthless, whilst ten trivial "it doesn't look quite as
pretty cons" are largely meaningless.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to