| 1 |
Because it would require us to change a whole load more than just the |
| 2 |
targets variable. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Plus we actually were the first coming up with the solution... |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes |
| 8 |
flameeyes@×××××××××.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> wrote: |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> On Sun, 2013-07-28 at 13:33 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: |
| 14 |
> > On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Leho Kraav <leho@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 15 |
> > > Wondering if there's any plan for proper convergence at some point? |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > I'd guess that the value of further convergence is so small that it |
| 18 |
> > will not be a priority for any of the teams. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > Cheers, |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > Dirkjan |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Ruby team has been very vocal about NOT changing it's way in the past. |
| 26 |
> |
Archives