On Thursday 03 January 2008, Wulf C. Krueger wrote: > On Thursday, 03. January 2008 11:18:19 Richard Brown wrote: > > While this thread remains highly entertaining, I'm sure as a past > > gentoo developer Roy remembers that we don't generally use gentoo-dev > > to bug fix poorly written makefiles, > > First of all, OpenRC is likely to become an integral part of Gentoo so its > discussion is most likely on-topic here. > > Furthermore, I prefer reading about "poorly written" Makefiles instead of > poorly written mails, dear Richard.
come guys, lesbie friends. Richard has a point that discussing broken makefiles generally isnt on topic for the list, but it'd be hard to maintain separate threads properly (off-list/somewhere else about building, on-list about conventions/changes/etc...). people miss things and the threads get fragmented and it's a mess. so please just bear the brunt of the on/off topic pieces as in the end the winner clearly is us. > You might want to remember that subscription to his mailinglist is no > longer mandatory if technical discussions bother you so much. this really wasnt needed. he had a valid concern. please give up some hugz. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
