1 |
On 21 August 2015 at 13:03, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> I'd rather see groups like QA making proposals to improve cross-Gentoo |
3 |
> consistency than see stagnation. It was an RFC, and people can post |
4 |
> issues with it, or escalate to Council if they're concerned. If |
5 |
> taking it to Council I'd suggest you might want to come up with a |
6 |
> better argument than "who cares about consistency?" |
7 |
|
8 |
|
9 |
Consistency is a fine goal, but "global" consistency can cost local |
10 |
consistency in detrimental ways. |
11 |
|
12 |
Hence why "DSLs" exist. For instance if we decided to make all sports |
13 |
consistent, we'd have 3 games where people hit balls with bats, and |
14 |
alternated between running with them and kicking them, and they'd all |
15 |
be consistent, but the game itself would become confusing and |
16 |
pointless. |
17 |
|
18 |
I think its fine for some parts of trees to have local standards, so |
19 |
that people using those parts of trees the most get the benefits out |
20 |
of huffmanization. |
21 |
|
22 |
No vote from me, I just don't see a point in changing something that |
23 |
isn't broken for the sake of change, where the result may be a net |
24 |
detriment and increase in complexity for consumers. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Kent |
28 |
|
29 |
KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL |