| 1 |
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:28:57 +0100 |
| 2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> And then why bother when the tree doesn't reflect PMS. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Maybe if some people would stop ignoring PMS on whim because they don't agree |
| 7 |
with something in it this wouldn't be the case. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Like, when does this end? Whenever there's a policy you don't agree with, |
| 10 |
you do whatever you want? And it's the policy that's the problem? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I don't get it. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Anyways, this has nothing to do with PMS. Using FEATURES in the tree was |
| 15 |
frowned upon long before it even existed. The fact that it wasn't documented |
| 16 |
as such outside of mailing lists and bug reports is the real bug. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark. |
| 21 |
gcc-porting, |
| 22 |
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |
Archives