On 2007/12/19, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:08:52 +0100 > Thomas de Grenier de Latour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There's no need to introduce a potential infinity of new files > > extensions for that. A single one is enough: just call files which > > use the rule i've proposed "foo.gbuild" instead of "foo.ebuild", and > > you're done. > > You're done until someone wants to introduce a change large enough > that it breaks the dodgy pattern matching package managers are doing > to get the EAPI currently.
You're done as long as ebuilds are written in bash. If there ever is a new xml-based format, or whatever else, then yes, a third extension will be needed. I don't see that as an argument for introducing an infinity of extensions right now though. -- TGL. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
