Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Why exactly does EAPI=1 need to be rushed?
Because the tree needed the functionality in question several years ago.
I thought the whole point of 0 was allowing a base, so that new stuff
could be developed while guaranteeing certain behaviour. What's the
hurry? It's
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:17:32 +0100
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Except there are. Hence why we want EAPI 1 in the short term, not
several years from now. The stuff that will take longer can go into
a later EAPI.
Man here we go again: I spend a lot of time helping and being helped
