| 1 |
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:24:15 +0100 Maurice van der Pot |
| 2 |
<griffon26@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
| > I'm in favour of 2) personally, but others disagree. I'd like a |
| 5 |
| > proper discussion on this before trying to get the GLEP through. |
| 6 |
| |
| 7 |
| What I am still missing is a good argument _FOR_ negatives. We are |
| 8 |
| talking about negatives within groups, right? I agree with you that if |
| 9 |
| we choose 2, sooner or later it's going to get screwed up. We must |
| 10 |
| have a better reason for allowing them than just the off chance that |
| 11 |
| negatives might be useful in a way we cannot forsee yet. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Reasons we want to allow negatives: |
| 14 |
* They are useful in certain situations. |
| 15 |
* They could reasonably be expected to work -- negatives work in other |
| 16 |
places. |
| 17 |
* Not supporting negatives simply because they cause complications is |
| 18 |
basically admitting that we suck. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools) |
| 22 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 23 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives