| 1 |
Olivier Crete wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2005-13-12 at 21:09 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:53:45 -0500 Olivier Crete <tester@g.o> |
| 4 |
>> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> | Why not just modify GlEP 1 ? |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Going back and retroactively modifying standards is icky, and it |
| 8 |
>> *still* doesn't address the issue of documenting why the change was |
| 9 |
>> made. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> And why not just adding a changelog to the glep explaining the changes? |
| 12 |
> I really don't like to idea of having to read 8 gleps to find out how to |
| 13 |
> write a glep ... and calling it glep 1.a is a good idea.. or 1.1 |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
agree, have to dig multiple places to get the history of a document is |
| 17 |
annoying. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives