On 09/05/2012 05:29 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > > Yes, I stated it because I view it as useful/sane. > >> and isn't a compromise at all. > > I think you're mistaken in assuming a compromise is the required > outcome of this. Given the choice between something productive, and > something not productive, you don't choose the quasi-productive > solution.
>From a developer's perspective, it's obviously better to be able to do whatever you want. But for users it'd be nice to be able to request a bump to EAPI5 and not get told to buzz off. Some people are unhappy with the current situation or this thread wouldn't exist. A good compromise should make everyone just a little bit unhappy =)
