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 

Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org

More information about the devel mailing list