1 |
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:02:41 +0100 |
2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > We also don't know when we'll have a spec of what EAPI 3 is, so |
4 |
> > there's no point in tinkering with PMS until we do. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Come on. Renaming from 3 to 4 is trivial. |
7 |
|
8 |
...and, from the looks of things, completely wrong. Zac has started |
9 |
putting some of the things that that patch moved from 3 to 4 in the |
10 |
3_pre series. Now we're going to have to play a fun game of bouncing |
11 |
things backwards and forward between EAPIs to match Zac's whims, which |
12 |
don't seem to agree with the most recent Council vote on the subject. |
13 |
|
14 |
As I said when Christian first asked, waiting until all this had been |
15 |
settled before doing anything is the much better solution. |
16 |
|
17 |
-- |
18 |
Ciaran McCreesh |