On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:07:20 +0100
Steven J Long sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
I missed the clamour of developers complaining about this
oh-so-burdensome restriction that they've been dealing with for at
least 5 years.
Why do you think I wrote the awful hack that is versionator?
Anything
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:07:20 +0100
Steven J Long sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
I missed the clamour of developers complaining about this
oh-so-burdensome restriction that they've been dealing with for at
least 5 years.
Why do you think I wrote the awful hack
2009/5/18 Steven J Long sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk:
David Leverton wrote:
2009/5/17 Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org:
I think the way eapi-2 was introduced into the tree wasn't particularly
problematic.
I think there might be a misunderstanding here. Ciaran means functions
provided by the
2009/5/17 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org:
On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
Piotr Jaroszyński pe...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hello,
I have just updated GLEP 55 [1], hopefully making it a bit clearer.
Just FYI, my order of preference of solutions is:
1. EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (obviously)
2.
On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:15:24 -0600
Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'd like 2 if we could have multiple same-versioned ebuilds of
different EAPI. 3 is good enough for me.
We couldn't. Allowing multiple equal but different ebuilds gets highly
crazy -- EAPIs aren't orderable, so it's not
