On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:49:38 +0100
Christian Faulhammer <fauli@g.o> wrote:
> as the council did not show any interest in further additions to EAPI
> 3 on their mailing list [1] and most PMS, council, Prefix and PM
> members will be happy to push out an decideable EAPI 3 draft fast, I
> want to tie the features:
> 
> * mtime preservation, bug 264130
> * Prefix offset support, bug 296716
> 
> No matter how nice other features would be, we should regard EAPI
> 3 similar to EAPI 1 which was a quick thing to get some small 
> features done.  Any objections?

Unfortunately, Zac is doing otherwise, and experience shows that what
Zac does ends up being the final decision. You'll need to either
convince him to revert the other things he's put in EAPI 3 (which I
think is just unpack changes, so far), or get the Council to make him
do so, or persuade the Council to change their minds on what's in 3.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh