On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:22:57 -0700 Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/12/2012 10:12 AM, 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. > > If we do go with a variant of GLEP 55, I'd prefer a variant that uses > a constant extension (like .eb) and places the EAPI string just after > the version component of the name. For example: > > foo-1.0-r1-eapi5.ebuild Or .eapi5.ebuild, to make it more of a suffix and less of PV part. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
