El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 12:37 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió: > On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:38:09 +0200 > Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote: > > If you don't understand something of what thus far has been written, > > then why not ask specific questions to fill those gaps, and move on? > > The multilib material isn't at the point where specific questions can be > asked. Brian's description of it as an "opaque list of things" is > pretty much spot on. That's why we want a GLEP and a PMS diff -- an > attempt at those might bring this to the point where we can say > something other than "huh?". >
Looks like you have now opted to use Brian's comment as a kind of "shield" of similar and discuss only about multilib, even when this thread was more general and we were talking to the problems shown in recent discussions (from forcing rebuilds issue, optional deps problems to some trivial questions like know where we can see what things are being worked out for eapi5). In all that discussions there were a clear tendency to always say "it's fine the way it's", even when a lot of people didn't even know what things were going to be included in eapi5, or discuss for days about the forcing rebuilds issue (with the, now classical, glib vs dbus-glib/g-i issue) to finally still tell people "we still didn't fully know what the problem was". I remember that, just after Brian and Zac's comments about trying to clarify things a bit on that thread and reach a solution, your reply to them was that we were missing a brilliant opportunity to "encourage developers put in a bit more work to save users a huge amount of pain here". Personally, I see a clear difference about their way to show their disagreement and yours. Of course, I know how this thread will end: once we decide to stop replying (or anybody asks us to stop) as you seem to find this happy or so and, of course, you will always say the last word, the problem will get stalled until three months later somebody else rises the problem again letting you to show again that "always rejecting position" you seem to like.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
