| 1 |
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:38:04PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:32:03 -0800 Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
> | You're ignoring that new style virtuals can have versions; thus |
| 5 |
> | virtual/tr-[arbitrary version <1] |
| 6 |
> | can be 'almost full 1 support'. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Which means what, in terms of parts of tr1 that are and aren't supplied |
| 9 |
> by various people? There's no nice neat linear progression there, |
| 10 |
> beyond most things requiring a few of the new basic utilities. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The linear progression would be made up as you go- admittedly, if a |
| 13 |
third provider shows up, scheme goes to hell. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Don't claim it's the best notion, but it's definitely a fallback |
| 16 |
option assuming nothing decent is found. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
~harring |
Archives