| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> From the other thread ("example conversion of gentoo-x86 current |
| 4 |
> deps to unified dependencies"): |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
[Sorry, I've missed this one in the other thread, so replying here.] |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
>> 4) It is not exherbo's DEPENDENCIES. Meaning it is not label based. |
| 9 |
>> Meaning you do not need to knee-jerk attack it because of some |
| 10 |
>> notion it's ciaran based/related. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
What kind of reasoning is this? Does it mean that the syntax was |
| 13 |
deliberately changed to make it different from exherbo's? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
We should accept (or reject) things based on their technical merits, |
| 16 |
not because of ad-hominem or "not invented here" arguments. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Ulrich |
Archives