On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:18:35 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:33 PM, hasufell <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > "epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still
> > > not implemented as a real helper function.
> > 
> > Because then its harder to change, it must be in PMS, otherwise you
> > have to do things like test which version of epatch the package
> > manager provides....sounds a lot like EAPI :)
> > 
> 
> You know, that's actually a pretty good case *for* base.eclass,
> eutils.eclass and similar... we should probably move more functions
> there...  :D 

I'm not sure that having to make sure you don't break ten thousand
packages whenever you make a change is a good case... When it's EAPI
controlled, if a change causes problems, it doesn't break anything.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to