Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote:
> > So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> > anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>
> - rewrite it as an rfc using a markup among xmlrfc, docbook, guidexml.
What technical reason is there to use a markup that's more work for
those of us doing the writing? Writing XML is a huge pain in the ass
compared to latex.
> - use EBNF when describing a syntax.
Is there any indication that this is any clearer? EBNF gets messy when
it comes to describing the whitespace rules, for example.
> - split it and version each functional part.
>
> - define EAPI as an aggregate of those versions in a separate part.
From a package manager implementer's perspective, that's a mess. It
means looking all over the place to find relevant information on, say,
what a package dep spec looks like.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
|
|
