Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Because a) a future EAPI might want to change EAPI into a function > rather than a variable,
Why? It couldn't be dynamic - not if you're going to put it in the filename as well. And why have it in two places? If you are going to put the EAPI in the filename, why put it inside the ebuild as well? We don't do that with version numbers or package names. > b) there are a zillion ways of setting a > variable in bash and people already use all of them and c) introducing > new weird format requirements is silly. But this GLEP is already proposing a format requirement. It is just putting it in the filename instead of in the ebuild contents. It isn't like you could just put anything in the filename anywhere you want and the package manager will be able to understand it. If devs are going to have to get correct "-1" at the end of the filename, why couldn't they also get right "EAPI=1" inside the file?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
