On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:13:41 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Yes, it did. And you are consistently wasting your and ours time > complaining that we're doing illegal stuff without trying to bring > even a single solution to it.
Uh, there are plenty of solutions, and they've been discussed every time this topic has come up. > Do you even care? Or are you just complaining because you don't have > anything useful to do? I care that people write code that actually works. > If you care, then you should consider finding a good solution which > will fix the code now, instead of saying 'it is illegal' and 'we can > fix it in an awful way in next 10 years'. EAPI 5 doesn't appear to be 10 years off. And there are several good solutions, all of which have been discussed previously. The best is to write smaller, less convoluted eclasses that don't mix functionality and overriding default functions. > > Or to put it another way, the point of having a spec is not to give > > you something to argue about every time it is brought up. > > You know, good specs come with a thing called 'rationale' for various > points. You're welcome to write it. You seem to have lots of free time. I'd even be happy to point you in the direction of all the previous discussions of this kind of thing, if you have difficulty finding them. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
