| 1 |
On 2014-11-21 10:31, hasufell wrote: |
| 2 |
> Are you serious? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Instead of creating random competing concepts in one repository we |
| 5 |
> should rather enhance configuration options, so that the USER can choose |
| 6 |
> what he likes instead of the developer. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> I think this is a very bad idea. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> If we all decide to drop the eclass, then fine. Until then, users don't |
| 11 |
> have any convenient way to have games world-executable without |
| 12 |
> overwriting the eclass (which I currently do myself). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Personally I've seen somewhat competing concepts evolve in the tree over |
| 15 |
the past years, specifically python/ruby eclass (r)evolution springs to |
| 16 |
mind. Stuff didn't immediately get deprecated in those cases but only |
| 17 |
after a certain period of burn-in for the newer work. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I guess this case is somewhat different in that the outcome is a bit |
| 20 |
more visible to the average user and people want to remove the thing |
| 21 |
entirely. If this is a step in that direction fine and maybe this will |
| 22 |
help spur discussion to get that moving somewhere. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Tim |
Archives