On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Petteri Räty <betelge...@gentoo.org> wrote: > My notes so far: > > 1) Status quo > - does not allow changing inherit > - bash version in global scope > - global scope in general is quite locked down > > 2) EAPI in file extension > - Allows changing global scope and the internal format of the ebuild > a) .ebuild-<eapi> > - ignored by current Portage > b) .<eapi>.ebuild > - current Portage does not work with this > c) .<eapi>.<new extension> > - ignored by current Portage > > 3) EAPI in locked down place in the ebuild > - Allows changing global scope > - EAPI can't be changed in an existing ebuild so the PM can trust > the value in the cache > - Does not allow changing versioning rules unless version becomes a > normal metadata variable > * Needs more accesses to cache as now you don't have to load older > versions if the latest is not masked > a) <new extension> > b) new subdirectory like ebuilds/ > - we could drop extension all together so don't have to argue about > it any more > - more directory reads to get the list of ebuilds in a repository > c) .ebuild in current directory > - needs one year wait >
I don't see the point of some of these... a shorter extension would be nice but not really necessary. .<eapi>.ebuild so like .2.ebuild 'cause that'd work great? smith-1.3.6.2.ebuild better yet vanilla-sources-2.6.28.2.2.ebuild yeah I can see that working out... no it wouldn't or maybe smith-1.3.6.eapi-2.ebuild just too long here's an idea, perhaps not a great one... but perhaps it'll make someone else think... how about this on the first line # eapi-2 and instead of sourcing it, have portage match it with a regex first, figure out the eapi, then source it. I don't know if I really like like what I'm proposing, but I don't see anything else that looks good. -- Caleb Cushing http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
