>>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Matt Turner wrote:
> From the other thread ("example conversion of gentoo-x86 current
> deps to unified dependencies"):
[Sorry, I've missed this one in the other thread, so replying here.]
>> 4) It is not exherbo's DEPENDENCIES. Meaning it is not label based.
>> Meaning you do not need to knee-jerk attack it because of some
>> notion it's ciaran based/related.
What kind of reasoning is this? Does it mean that the syntax was
deliberately changed to make it different from exherbo's?
We should accept (or reject) things based on their technical merits,
not because of ad-hominem or "not invented here" arguments.
Ulrich
