On Wed, 1 May 2013 19:40:06 -0600 Ryan Hill <dirtye...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Wed, 1 May 2013 08:57:35 +0200 > Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > >>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Ryan Hill wrote: > > > Then the person implementing the code for Paludis is either a > > > monkey or a robot*. Anyone capable of reasoning could puzzle out > > > the implications of not allowing user-given options to override > > > the defaults. Obviously you can write code that follows a spec > > > but is still broken or useless. > > > > > *or both (?!) > > > > Oh please... The person simply made a mistake, which happens when > > programming, and which he fixed. No reason for calling him names. > > Sorry, I was under the impression that they were refusing to > acknowledge it as a mistake on the grounds that it was allowed by the > spec, despite the consequences, and demanding ebuilds to be "fixed" > instead. I have other names for those people I could use but I doubt
Er, we are. Following the spec is not a mistake. If there's a mistake, it was made by the Council when they approved the wording. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
