>>>>> On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote: > I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we > kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating > that the mangler were allowed to find the EAPI without sourcing (and > giving the restrictions) once portage 2.2 was stable, or the ability > to handle this backported to 2.1.6, and issued in a release?
Even if we do only a one-time change of the file extension, can we ever get rid of the old extension? Or are we then stuck with two extensions in the tree until the end of time? Let's assume for the moment that we change from ".ebuild" to ".eb". Then we obviously cannot change all ebuilds in the tree to ".eb", otherwise old Portage versions would see an empty tree and there would be no upgrade path. Or am I missing something? Ulrich
