| 1 |
On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:04:01 +0300 |
| 2 |
Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 10/09/2011 11:01 πμ, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Hello, |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Is there a real reason to have <herd>no-herd</herd>? As I see it, |
| 8 |
> > it's just an ugly hack which all programs have to learn and hack |
| 9 |
> > for no benefit. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> What is the problem with that? Why is it an ugly hack? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Because it's explicitly saying 'none'. It's like requiring programs to |
| 14 |
pass "NONE" rather than NULL/None/undef. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Because every program which is supposed to list herds, needs to grab |
| 17 |
the list and strip 'no-herd' from it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
And what if a package has '<herd>foo</herd><herd>no-herd</herd>'? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Best regards, |
| 23 |
Michał Górny |
Archives