Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Handling NoDo features
Re: Handling NoDo features
From: Dominik Riebeling <dominik.riebeling_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:31:20 +0100
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> I completely agree with Frank here.
> Frank didn't say anything about subjective reasons. I'm the one who said a
> subjective reason ought to be good enough.
Sorry, I was a bit unclear. I simply wanted to express that I agree
with the things Frank originally said. It's debatable how "hard" a
rationale is in relation to a reason. My understanding of "rationale"
is to be a more technical variant of "reason". Though I'm not a native
speaker, so it might be a good idea to define the meaning of
"rationale" (just looked it up and it does match my current
understanding in my language, though translations aren't 1:1 at all :)
In other words, I agree that a NoDo item needs some kind of reasoning
why it's a NoDo. I don't think that a NoDo developers agree on that
have no technical but only subjective reasons should be invalid, given
that there is a majority agreeing.
Received on 2010-03-23