On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 22:14:57 -0400
Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What about the PMS EAPI 1 documentation do you consider 'not
> > proper'?
> I was personally expecting to see some sort of section called "EAPI-1"
> that contains something like:
> "EAPI-1 consists of EAPI-0 with the following features added..."
> Then an explanation of each change and the appropriate syntax.
> I did see how EAPI-1 is integrated throughout the document, which is
> valuable in a different way - but it's harder to answer the question
> "What exactly does EAPI-1 add to EAPI-0?"

The way it is now is valuable to package manage people, since they need
to know things like "my parser must be able to do foo, bar and baz",
not "my parser must be able to do foo" and then hidden away later "the
parser must also do bar and baz for EAPI 1".

> Perhaps I'll try sending you a patch with something like that, if I
> have time, and if it would be appreciated.

We've discussed having a purely informative appendix with a summary of
changes between EAPIs, and references to all the relevant sections. But
no-one's ever wanted it enough to submit a patch...

Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to