On 13 March 2012 06:53, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > There are very good reasons not to embed this information in the > filename. That it makes the filename harder to parse for the human eye > and more difficult to type is one of them. > > Besides, we already have a council decision about that GLEP.
Difficulty in typing them is not really much of an argument, considering the present complexity with file-names already having versions encoded in them. And difficulty reading them isn't much of an argument really either. But difficulty identifying the format systematically seems a reasonable enough objection, and for this, I can see the translation of abz-123.ebuild-5 to -> abz-123.eapi5.eb Being a more practical change ( or something of that nature ). At least that way, its easier to have a way to find "all ebuilds" without needing extension permutation. Another thought: Presently we have versions encoded in the file name. If we ever decide we need to change our versioning syntax or versioning semantics, we might be up the creek without a paddle, and EAPI being *in* the file will probably make that harder, and I'd probably prefer some sort of out-of-band location for EAPI in that situation too. -- Kent perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"
