Dan Meltzer wrote: > On 1/28/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Dan Meltzer wrote: >> > Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do? >> > >> >> Top posting... >> >> Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the >> eclasses/eclass functions used and the new eclasses have been proven >> stable already. >> >> Regards, >> Petteri >> > > okay, i'll bottom post this time just for variety. From opfers post > it sounded like he was proposing to allow this for all packages (not > just java). I was enquiring after that. >
Yeah, just wanted to give the background that started this discussion. I agree that we should not start loosening the policy ligthly. Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
