1 |
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:03:18AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:53:36 -0500 Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> |
3 |
> wrote: |
4 |
> | On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 11:29:56PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
5 |
> | > On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:06 -0500 Kito <kito@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> | > | > b) assume that you'll not have to modify ebuilds |
7 |
> | > | |
8 |
> | > | I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive assumption have |
9 |
> | > | they? |
10 |
> | > |
11 |
> | > pvdabeel has for pathspec. |
12 |
> | > |
13 |
> | > | > and c) |
14 |
> | > | > demand that as soon as it's available, it works for all ebuilds. |
15 |
> | > | |
16 |
> | > | I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive demand have they? |
17 |
> | > |
18 |
> | > pvdabeel has for pathspec. |
19 |
> | |
20 |
> | You're not talking to pvdabeel right now, so kindly be quiet about |
21 |
> | him. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Oh come off it. You claim that no dev has made this naive demand when |
24 |
> at least one quite clearly has on several occasions. All three of my |
25 |
> points are entirely relevant to the discussion, since every other time |
26 |
> this has come up at least one said mistakes has been made. |
27 |
|
28 |
Again, do you see anyone here claiming all are simple? It's the same |
29 |
points made last time around, those who want it do the work, it's |
30 |
going to be bumpy and will require work, but those who want it are the |
31 |
ones who have to do it. |
32 |
|
33 |
Bluntly, stick to the discussion of prefix, or go elsewhere. Bash |
34 |
pvdabeel if you like but sure as hell not on this list since no one |
35 |
cares, further since it's not relevant to the _current_ discussion, |
36 |
where people are actually attempting to pull this off. |
37 |
|
38 |
If as you posit, it's not been discussed/planned properly, I suggest |
39 |
you stick to contributing to the discussion and planning of it. The |
40 |
alternative is that people get fed up with the the ancillary bullshit, |
41 |
and they implement it themselves (which I'm sure you would dislike). |
42 |
~harring |