On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 09:13:11PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: > On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 11:57:47AM -0700, Chris Waters wrote: > > I don't know if it can always be avoided. > [snip lots of good examples where this is unavoidable]
> > I would go for strongly discouraging the practice, but I think that > > flat-out forbidding it might be excessive at this point. > Hence this being "should not", rather than "must not". We're aware > that it's not alwars possible, and you phrased it wonderfully. We want > to strongly discourage it, rather than flat-out forbidding it :) "Should not" says that it's always a bug--just not an RC bug. I'm saying that perhaps sometimes it's not a bug. Although I strongly agree that it should _usually_ be a bug. In fact, as the tcl/tk maintainer, I have a vested interest in making it always be a bug. But I'm trying to bend over backwards to be fair to my dependents...or non-dependents, as the case may be. I would love to see perl-tk built against my packages. But I realize there are valid reasons why it's currently not. Anyway, I'm not going to formally object or anything. I just wanted to toss the notion out and see what happened. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
