| 1 |
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 22:07:30 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:25:58 +0100 |
| 4 |
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:21:42 +0200 |
| 6 |
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > So... what is your issue in here, sir? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > The issue is what Zac, Ian and I were discussing, before you jumped |
| 10 |
> > in and started yelling. Repeating it for you: |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > We want to know, for dependencies that are in DEPEND and not |
| 13 |
> > RDEPEND, whether or not most of them will become HDEPENDs, if |
| 14 |
> > dependencies are being expressed properly. If that is the case, |
| 15 |
> > then it makes more sense to introduce TDEPEND than HDEPEND. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The only person yelling here is you. I have politely asked a question, |
| 18 |
> and then you come with your wisdom not answering it at all. And if you |
| 19 |
> haven't noticed, my question was directed to Ian who -- unlike you -- |
| 20 |
> may be able to say something meaningful in the topic rather than |
| 21 |
> diverging from it just to prove a random point only you know. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Ian and I are asking essentially the same question regarding the same |
| 24 |
issue, and I believe you're the only interested person so far who has |
| 25 |
had any difficulty understanding that. However, if hearing it from |
| 26 |
someone other than me makes it easier for you to accept that there is |
| 27 |
something to discuss, then you're welcome to pretend that everything |
| 28 |
that I say from now on was written by someone other than me. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives