| 1 |
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:30:07 +0200 |
| 2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 09/25/2012 05:25 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:17:07 +0200 |
| 6 |
> > hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 9 |
> >> Hash: SHA1 |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> >> On 09/25/2012 05:10 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 12 |
> >>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:04:55 +0200 hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |
| 13 |
> >>> wrote: |
| 14 |
> >>>> Do we need an implementation beforehand? Afaik zac said that the |
| 15 |
> >>>> implementation would not be very complicated, so why not vote on |
| 16 |
> >>>> this now/soon? |
| 17 |
> >>> |
| 18 |
> >>> Well we can't really compare it to SDEPEND (which is implemented |
| 19 |
> >>> in Paludis, for kdebuild-1 and exheres-0) without at least a |
| 20 |
> >>> half-arsed implementation. |
| 21 |
> >>> |
| 22 |
> >>> Also, speaking as someone who *has* implemented this kind of |
| 23 |
> >>> thing, I have extreme doubts as to the viability of the proposal. |
| 24 |
> >>> So I'd be extremely wary of voting in favour of it until we've |
| 25 |
> >>> been able to have a play with an implementation. |
| 26 |
> >>> |
| 27 |
> >> |
| 28 |
> >> sorry? |
| 29 |
> >> |
| 30 |
> >> I don't see an answers to any of my questions. |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > he wants an implementation beforehand :) |
| 33 |
> > |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Is he a council member? |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
That doesn't prevent him from talking from past experiences and giving |
| 39 |
his opinion. Council is free to ignore his request also. |
Archives