Matti Bickel wrote: > Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Mixing 'gt' and 'ge' is a bad idea. >> >> >> >> Just outa curiosity, why? >> > >> > Because it's inconsistent and one generally assumes that people will be >> > consistent with the way they test numbers. That way you only need to >> > read the number rather than continually checking every single line to >> > see how exactly it's tested for. >> > >> I don't see how this is inconsistent either: two tests are needed, so >> that both patches are only applied for >=2.6.22 and first only if >> >2.6.20. > > The point is that if you stick to "ge" OR "gt", everyone could just skip > reading the comparison and focus on the numbers. Will be fixed in the > next release, along with kernel-2.4 support... > OIC: so the argument was it should be ge 2.6.21 as well? Does that catch all the same cases?
I must say I find this criticism unusual: if someone were looking at the ebuild to check the numbers, I would guess it were because something was going wrong. As such, they would be paying attention to which version they were on, and what the tests were. I don't see the use-case for limiting what maintainers can do in such a fashion, but if it makes no difference to the outcome (ie which cases are covered), i guess it makes sense. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
