sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such
- From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:34:45 -0700
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:41:59AM +0200, Flavien Bridault wrote:
> Le mercredi 20 avril 2005 ? 11:33 +0200, Benoit PAPILLAULT a ?crit :
> > Seth Alan Woolley a ?crit :
> > > The list below is more accurate, as the perl-deprecateds will be
> > > deleted
> > > and didn't have history entries put on them when they were made
> > > deprecated.
> >
> > >>Maybe sorcery should assume a spell with INSTALL in it is build api 2?
> > >>
> > >>Or we could just fix these spells...
> >
> > Fixing spell is easier IMO and it's better that spells work as they
> > should do and as we have documented, instead of adding a new (and
> > useless) feature to sorcery.
>
> Yes, we can't add a sorcery feature for every mistake made by
> developers... ;-)
>
> Fixing spells sounds well better, even if Sandalle should definitively
> be no longer your friend, Seth :-D
Music to my ears (or something)
You guys rule! :-)
-Andrew
--
__________________________________________________________________________
|Andrew D. Stitt | astitt at sourcemage.org |
|irc: afrayedknot | afrayedknot at t.armory.com |
|aim: thefrayedknot or iteratorplusplus | acedit at armory.com |
|Sorcery Team Lead | ftp://t.armory.com/ |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
[SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Flavien Bridault, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Andrew, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Andrew, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Flavien Bridault, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Eric Sandall, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.