Archives
Archives
| From: | Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | k_f@g.o | ||
| Cc: | gentoo-project@l.g.o, Gentoo Council <council@g.o> | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 | ||
| Date: | Mon, 26 Oct 2015 12:52:12 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAGfcS_mZSaQdsoAEenGGPpKX1n7y-WDEtKS=XYBXkz=iY=iucw@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 by Kristian Fiskerstrand |
||
| 1 | On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 3:47 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | > I haven't read through the references yet, but is it also stated that |
| 3 | > eapply_user needs to be applied at least once in addition to being |
| 4 | > idempotent? |
| 5 | > |
| 6 | |
| 7 | It says it must be applied once. The reference in this case is just a |
| 8 | diff to one line, so you should probably just read it. :) |
| 9 | |
| 10 | If anybody has additional pros/cons to the idempotent proposal that |
| 11 | haven't already been raised I'm all ears. I was against the change |
| 12 | but I'm willing to go along with it based on the arguments so far. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | -- |
| 15 | Rich |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 | Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-11-08 | hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |