| 1 |
Anders Ossowicki wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 31/03/2008, *Thilo Bangert* <bangert@g.o |
| 3 |
> <mailto:bangert@g.o>> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Please think things through before asking to have pkgcore's bugs |
| 6 |
> > 'fixed' via specification next time... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> maybe my english language skills or social interaction qualities are |
| 9 |
> failing me, but i find the above sentence highly offensive. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> pkgcore crashes on ebuilds with explicit -r0 in the PV, which led to |
| 13 |
> Brian Harring bringing this entire discussion up in the first place. |
| 14 |
> Rather than getting pkgcore to handle -r0 correctly, he decided to try |
| 15 |
> and get it banned through the specification. |
| 16 |
That bug has been adressed, still leaves the underlying problem wether |
| 17 |
to allow this ambiguity or not. If you have the patience to read the |
| 18 |
pingpong between Harring and McCreesh the current discussion is wether |
| 19 |
that format even makes sense, not wether a fixed bug in a third-party |
| 20 |
app is relevant. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Please note, the above does not imply anything about my feelings |
| 23 |
> towards the original proposal, so please don't take it as such. I |
| 24 |
> really couldn't care less what you decide to do or not do. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> am i too thin skinned for gentoo-dev? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> In this particular case, I'd say yes :-) |
| 29 |
I'd say no. There's no need for ad hominem attack in what is supposed to |
| 30 |
be a technical discussion. |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives