| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 3 |
> <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:11:18 -0700 |
| 5 |
>> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> GLEP 55: On hold pending a concrete requirement for it. GLEP 54 may |
| 7 |
>>> be, but that's unclear until it's been revised. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Which part of the 'Problem' section in the GLEP didn't you understand? |
| 10 |
>> Do you seriously consider not being able to add or change global scope |
| 11 |
>> functions in future EAPIs to be a non-issue, or were you ignoring those |
| 12 |
>> two bullet points? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I understood both. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> As far as could be determined by the members at the meeting there no |
| 17 |
> compelling examples in Gentoo who to change or add global scope functions |
| 18 |
> in future EAPIs. As such those problems as stated are not in scope for Gentoo |
| 19 |
> because Gentoo is not attempting to do those things at this time. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
ugh, s/who// |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> -- |
| 26 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives