On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 16:50 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 16:45:06 +0000 > Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Alright, so where would you stick EAPI such that all the > > > requirements that've previously been described are met? > > > > I neither know, nor care. > > > > I just feel very strongly that the current proposal is wrong, and no > > requirements that you or others may have can possibly outweigh that. > > So you have no technical objections, no alternatives, no understanding > of why it's necessary and no actual reason to call it 'wrong'.
Hard to have technical objections to the contents of a string :) Actual reasons were stated in the first email I posted in this thread to which to replied. I care not for alternatives, nor understanding as it's not my domain of expertise or knowledge. But I can smell a blatant hack that is just wrong to the bone like a lot of other people here. Just because you have a the only "solution" to a problem does not make it "right" by default. Thanks Roy -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
