On 03/12/2012 10:17 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 03/12/12 13:12, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:05:46 +0100 >> Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> See above, even if we should ever move away from bash, GLEP 55 is >>> still not needed. >> >> ...but we might as well go with GLEP 55 anyway, since GLEP 55 >> definitely works, whereas other solutions might work so long as we >> don't do something unexpected. >> >> This whole thing is just an exercise in trying to find excuses not to >> use GLEP 55. >> > > Not understanding any of the politics involved, what are the technical > arguments against it?
I think the bulk of resistance has been due to its use of an infinite series of extensions, like .ebuild-5, .ebuild-6 and so on. GLEP 55 itself has since been amended to include a "one time extension change" option [1]. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0055.html#eapi-in-the-filename-with-one-time-extension-change -- Thanks, Zac
