-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 15:56:18 -0800 >> It only comes into its own if you expect there to be a long time >> between an EAPI being used in the tree and an EAPI being supported by a >> package manager. And even then, it's probably easier to just do a minor >> stable release straight away with rules for "don't know how to use this >> EAPI, but do know how to read metadata cache entries for it" whilst >> keeping new EAPI support for the next major release. > > But how will it know if it supports those cache entries? Wouldn't > the easiest way to determine that be to have a DIGESTS version > identifier? Otherwise, the only way for it to know would be to parse > it and either throw a parse error if necessary or proceed all the > way to the digest verification step (if it doesn't hit a parse error > first).
Well, I guess you were saying that it should just use the EAPI. Given that we don't have much control over how often users upgrade, I'd still prefer to have a DIGESTS version identifier. - -- Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmYuUsACgkQ/ejvha5XGaOIcQCfctQ/heCKDzGmls3NNLulodsD g2AAnAwOd/JD+sHvDBPQSmx2LOHOiqjw =onL8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
