28 Oct
2006
28 Oct
'06
10:47 a.m.
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> writes:
Måns Rullgård wrote:
What you're saying is that because any system CAN be abused, rather try to start out with something sane, you incorporate an existing, already very abused, "system" lock, stock and barrel. Makes no sense to me.
Last time we discussed it we ended with a "who implements the codeclist got it in the spec", nobody stepped up with a list nicer than what we have now.
I don't see ANY list. I don't care if you copy someone else's list, or invent your own, but whatever you do, it HAS to be in the spec. -- Måns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com