Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: [Thu Oct 13 2005, 01:37:32PM CDT]
> Problem is that this would mean replace it with another GLEP then
> because it changes basically everything.
I would rather it be replaced by another GLEP, personally. Just yanking
it isn't sufficient, since it doesn't solve
On Friday 07 October 2005 14:25, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to get with the GLEP authors and propose a
> revision of the GLEP, since the concept is still the same "Gentoo ALT
> KEYWORDS", to make it fit better with the current situation?
Problem is that this would mean re
On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 00:03 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> For this reason I'd like to ask the retirement by scratch of GLEP22.. hope
> you'll let me do that without having to write a GLEP that removes a GLEP
> (it's recursive...)
Wouldn't it make more sense to get with the GLEP autho
Hi all,
In the last days on gentoo-alt we discussed about the need for a
reorganization of keywords for Gentoo/ALT projects, basically what is being
treated by GLEP22 currently.
And it was quite unanimous that GLEP22 solution is not adapt. Having a 4-part
keyword is not going to help anything.
