| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 09/25/2012 05:57 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I guess nothing is preventing them from reviewing it. However, |
| 7 |
> it's just a waste of time if you're just asking those guys to |
| 8 |
> review the GLEP, isn't it? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
That's what the GLEP workflow states, no? It's currently not accepted. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
On 09/25/2012 05:23 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Really? I thought it was pretty clearly. Yes, you need an |
| 17 |
> implementation beforehand. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Maybe you should read: |
| 21 |
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0001.html |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
"The reference implementation must be completed before any GLEP is |
| 25 |
given status "Final", but it need not be completed before the GLEP is |
| 26 |
accepted." |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
This is not about some EAPI stuff, this is about getting it _accepted_ |
| 29 |
not _implemented_. |
| 30 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 31 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 32 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQYdWfAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzjjIH/218/i8cD6jzdTOFskLQr8O8 |
| 35 |
PxOZAPDsRxKz9sVBLcN5I01RRATnr/xbhcomDa+/rLGP8Zz1ljk7mEwaXhXGg6fN |
| 36 |
l/lV0I62cjfWx1OJj9nqgq847TLLw1w+TKM/jfDvu2VXtMwBqiyg1U7+CeN7RWVH |
| 37 |
YdFOzKi3lJ1zH5oryT98htr6s+hceFie4JERlveODQn56vGG45c5c9vM0x7xxDce |
| 38 |
d+7lRozoEwp4AJA70zNskpEojYrJpBJNES/dt7GYO/Rt+sIqac4S8tUvNV3ro2a9 |
| 39 |
LV+Lr+qLvughdLtpewt95U63zeQJvfVbGIGwRlAaaUWYEI1IlOED6X25Zv3rQXo= |
| 40 |
=yexa |
| 41 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives