| 1 |
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:18:20PM +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote: |
| 2 |
> Duncan wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev |
| 4 |
> > likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^) |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Still, I'd prefer it referenced just for definition's sake, but when the |
| 7 |
> > portage dev says it isn't a superfluous reference, and that particular |
| 8 |
> > section is specifying portage implementation... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Nope, that particular section is specifying methods of interaction |
| 11 |
> between Portage and user. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It's not an issue. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So... no complaints, this means this *is* on the schedule for council, |
| 16 |
yes? |
| 17 |
~harring |
Archives