Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)
Matthew Garrett
mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Wed Feb 1 20:43:10 UTC 2012
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:25:05PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> The objections weren't addressed because they objected to the very point of
> the spec, making it impossible to address them without defeating the purpose
> of the spec.
A spec that allows two conformant implementations to differ to such a
degree that it's impossible for an application to work sensibly in both
implementations is a *bad* *spec*. The only argument anyone had against
that was "Oh, nobody would implement the spec in that way", which is
another huge blaring warning that it's a bad spec. There was a simple
and straightforward way of handling this, which was to rewrite the
problematic parts of the specification in order to constrain
implementations. But nobody bothered, and so it continues to be a bad
spec.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
More information about the devel
mailing list