| 1 |
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:43:56 +0200 Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| > At the risk of reopening a large can of worms, can somebody explain |
| 4 |
| > to me why the license groups idea won't run into the same conceptual |
| 5 |
| > issues that derailed GLEP 29 (USE groups)? Am I missing something |
| 6 |
| > obvious? |
| 7 |
| |
| 8 |
| Maybe my memory is wrong, but wasn't the problem only that people |
| 9 |
| couldn't agree on one set of semantics for negations and being afraid |
| 10 |
| of confusing users? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
No. The big problem with use groups was that they were designed to |
| 13 |
solve one particular problem: bulk enabling / disabling of use flags, |
| 14 |
but certain people also wanted to use them for use flag categorisation, |
| 15 |
for which the proposal sucked. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 19 |
Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org |
| 20 |
Web : http://ciaranm.org/ |
| 21 |
as-needed is broken : http://ciaranm.org/show_post.pl?post_id=13 |
Archives