May I say that naming the bump to 20071210 may have been a bad idea? As it is currently the live ebuild (i.e. -9999) is of a lesser version than the bump, and if you take a look at the changelog for linuxdcpp it is suggesting there will be a "1.0.x" release somewhere in the future. Becouse of this I suggest renaming linuxdcpp-20071012.ebuild to linuxdcpp-1.0.0.20071210.ebuild. Else we will end up in a situation where we may have to "downgrade" to get the latest version from time to time.
Fixed, thanks :)