-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 18/09/12 04:11 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:06:06 +0200 Michał Górny > <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> So far, I'm not sure if there was a single, complete, exact >> problem discussed which is solved by this syntax other than >> cosmetics. > > Perhaps you should read the GLEP then. >
IIRC, there were no *problems* listed in the glep. There were only a few things listed that DEPENDENCIES provides advantages over, and a few things that are (to varying degrees, depending on the dev) considered to be undesirable. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlBY2/kACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCcewD9FzAFNIrkumqyI3dZrkshNStu t5cqqE5YWYltwJwmW0IA/RQAJk2wtzdXp/4NDvJn3zZ3PJhjFODmonRdWab4u/Q7 =g1Xe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
