From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3890E138010 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 04:08:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 098C121C069; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 04:08:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f53.google.com (mail-vb0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB6B21C03D for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 04:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbbfc21 with SMTP id fc21so758839vbb.40 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:07:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=YXMWVY6sx1aAsy8SF67H22x2L2lU3ycaiQlkeezs7es=; b=VAsaUMH2howzwpDT+5xlY7Hy6KbyLies28GnCmeFx1cpphAMyGnculOIfP7rclGGwy 2wZfjkupSKh0vxBQGDn2RT7Hjnp5SnWiYedjoee2LY2ouaOwHe5MAdHdrx8t9ipHtODC 6w/8zc9kLThaGG4EXssGR5krtguM+uJ59dxLlWQmjsWCpkO6zS7DnSL7RZsPChFP7wi6 RrDz8IAxXwYcpZfZq4W2QGMhZ3q5fLFIbZidBa4ClBVo81OKo499TNfG5eYAjPzD4Ass s2HnSYxZTMgt1pB7c1BaeMYUUDHa/kTEQt0vkNR07I6sObiKxuBrDn/AOzxNo+UIQNAE L4ZA== 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 Received: by 10.220.142.5 with SMTP id o5mr1223157vcu.49.1348027663837; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:07:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yngwin@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.58.110 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:07:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120916135211.GC23030@localhost> <20120918102551.500ff19b@pomiocik.lan> <20120918092426.GA5384@localhost> <20568.16682.31115.233591@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120918110637.GF5384@localhost> <20568.25833.33593.344770@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:07:43 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: bY5qhHSpYHKaXZBJh6zS8D1ocd8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposal From: Ben de Groot To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: c0a0ba5b-40a6-4984-895e-e0e40ff82d31 X-Archives-Hash: 5a202a8a079e8ea99ee303e285dc4526 On 19 September 2012 03:18, Alec Warner wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> Readability is more important, and there I still don't buy the >> argument that the new syntax is better, and that any gain would >> outweigh the cost of changing. After all, the existing variables for >> dependency specification won't disappear, so devs would have to >> remember both. > > I agree it is a con, but is it a blocker? I mean basically any change > proposed requires know the old way, and the new way..that is how > changes work... Which is why changes need to have clear benefits that outweigh the costs of change. In this case the benefits are purely cosmetic, so they don't. Change for change' sake is not worth the effort. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin