Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
Richard Freeman wrote:
Without actually intending to open a new debate on that issue <cringes>,
I'm actually a fan of NOT obtaining PN and PV from the filename. I've
seen an approach like this used in various systems and I happen to like it:
In which systems did you see this approach?
A bunch of proprietary systems that nobody here would have heard of
(well, most likely). They had nothing to do with package management.
The systems in question use a distinct field to display record names
(which is user definable) and use separate fields to capture the content
of the record. In many cases the contents of some of these separate
fields end up in the informal record name field, but it is still
desirable that they be distinct.
Sorry if I implied that my example was directly related to gentoo or
package management. I was extrapolating from a completely different
field. However, I still think this is worth considering (entirely apart
from glep55). If I were building a portage system from scratch I'd
consider doing it this way. With all the history we have currently I'm
not sure I'd be eager to make this change now (though I guess we
actually could as part of a new EAPI).
