On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:11:18 -0700 Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > GLEP 55: On hold pending a concrete requirement for it. GLEP 54 may > be, but that's unclear until it's been revised.
Which part of the 'Problem' section in the GLEP didn't you understand? Do you seriously consider not being able to add or change global scope functions in future EAPIs to be a non-issue, or were you ignoring those two bullet points? -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
