Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 27 Dec
2007 18:11:33 +:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 18:03:27 +
Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 17:43 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Or to put it another way, you're objecting to
Piotr Jaroszy?ski wrote:
Hello,
I have updated the GLEP, hopefully it is less confusing now and hence the
discussion will be more technical.
Based on your summary of the suggestions on the list, I believe you
misunderstood what many of us were arguing for.
* Set the EAPI inside the
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 06:03:12 +
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Set the EAPI inside the ebuild in a way that makes it easy to
fetch it This is ok as atm only EAPI=1 is in the tree, so there is no
backward compatibility issue.
It's both a backwards and a forwards compatibility issue.
Piotr Jaroszyński [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 22 Dec 2007
16:43:10 +0100:
Abstract
This GLEP proposes usage of EAPI-suffixed file extensions for ebuilds
(for example, foo-1.2.3.ebuild-1).
This one does seem a marked improvement. Thanks.
On Saturday 22 of December 2007 19:26:08 Duncan wrote:
I made this suggestion earlier but it was deep in a subthread and perhaps
missed. Else, maybe it didn't reach you in time for this update.
Anyway, here it is again:
(snip)
Syntax:
PF.ebuild[-EAPI]
Thanks, added syntax specification
