| 1 |
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 17:59 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
[...] |
| 3 |
> > Don't care. Let's fix the problems we have *now* using solutions that |
| 4 |
> > we can agree upon, rather than try to foist solutions that a |
| 5 |
> > reasonably large population of developers *don't* like (even after |
| 6 |
> > extended debate) to solve problems that don't exist yet. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> No, let's fix it so we don't have to do the whole thing again in |
| 9 |
> another year or two. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I see nothing about the current problem that merits the fooling around |
| 12 |
with the ebuild extension. I've listened to and considered all the |
| 13 |
arguments that have been made, and I still stand by my opinion that it |
| 14 |
an unclean solution (meaning, we don't need to rehash those arguments |
| 15 |
again here). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Bottom line, we (everyone who has been on this discussion from the |
| 18 |
beginning) disagree. Just as we did a year ago. Standing steadfast on |
| 19 |
the filename extension just means that all the version format problems |
| 20 |
that you're trying to solve are going to stand blocked because of it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I think it makes far more sense to work towards agreeing on a solution |
| 23 |
rather than restating the same arguments every 6 months and reaching the |
| 24 |
same impasse. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- Arun |
Archives