| 1 |
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:38:08 +0100 |
| 2 |
Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Just to have it spelt out, what you suggest here is that EAPI has a |
| 4 |
> single value, a word or a number, that refers to a set of "features |
| 5 |
> and rules", if I understand correctly. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> With this way of using EAPI I fail to see why EAPIs aren't orderable. |
| 8 |
> Even with the example you gave in the previous mail, it looks like a |
| 9 |
> perfect succession of EAPIs. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
It doesn't *have* to be a perfect succession. It's entirely possible |
| 12 |
that there will be, say, two divergent EAPI branches or even that there |
| 13 |
will be a completely unrelated new EAPI format. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives