From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEF5A139694 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:51:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 25A0021C08E; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3D7A21C06C for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:51:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e34:eeaa:6bd0:4ecc:6aff:fe03:1cfc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: aballier) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6CC4C341421 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:51:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:51:01 +0100 From: Alexis Ballier To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424 Message-ID: <20170323105101.0f622f66@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1652433.oqbzW57v8l@porto> References: <20170316093806.31977-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> <20170320083544.GZ24205@vapier> <2240597.YoP4Ev77Vx@porto> <1652433.oqbzW57v8l@porto> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 24e15ffb-b365-4fb8-855e-9a3355dd3fea X-Archives-Hash: 4b6ba97ba9c15c07743e63b0e0f2e6e1 On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:41:39 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Am Dienstag, 21. M=C3=A4rz 2017, 11:24:39 CET schrieb Andreas K. Huettel: > >=20 > > So what's so special about your packages that you *need* a hack as > > ugly as eblits? > > =20 >=20 > No response. Seems like there are no real arguments for eblits. >=20 I guess the argument is not for or against eblit but rather about "when you want to change something you don't maintain, you have to justify it properly"