Hi,
Bjoern Meier:
I entirely concur his language was unacceptable.
Really? All that because of that a human being used an emotional
language?
Yes. Human beings are perfectly able to communicate dislike for another
human's actions in a way that does not imply disrespect for that person.
Geeks don't complain
Geeks don't worry
:-)
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Hi,
Bjoern Meier:
I entirely concur his language was unacceptable.
Really? All that because of that a human being used an emotional
language?
Yes. Human beings are perfectly able to
Hi,
Michael Ole Olsen:
Geeks don't complain
Please don't top- and full-quote. :-P
Geeks don't worry
Good thing I don't think of myself as a geek any more, then.
Is Debian development/maintainership only meant for geeks??
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Yes. Human beings are perfectly able to communicate dislike for another
human's actions in a way that does not imply disrespect for that person.
But Debian beings are not able to distinguish between disrespect
for actions made by some person (while
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 10:09:10PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Adam Borowski:
The only acceptable concrete value for 'extremely few' is Zero.
I'd say losing patience is quite understandable in this case
Probably. However, the context of this thread was not at all about a
maintainer
hi,
2014-10-12 21:07 GMT+02:00 Steven J. Long i...@fu-coders.org:
I entirely concur his language was unacceptable.
Really? All that because of that a human being used an emotional
language? Are we - as a community - on a point were respect is
one-sided? Are we really so unstable, that an
On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 16 h 41, the keyboard of Paul Seelig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, let's be serious again: unfortunately this actually means that
some of the most obvious installation profiles of slink stay to be
unnecessarily bloated.
Giving the size of the current
Might it be possible to include fewer packages in each profile and then
present the user with a list of additional packages that might be of
interest to them given that they have chosen this particular profile?
Something like You have installed the Scientific Workstation profile. The
[ redundant emacs versions ]
Well, I'll suggest that for potato. It will start a nice flame-war on
debian-devel emacs vs. xemacs.
Hey, that's just what we need at this stage for *slink*! :-)
Okay, let's be serious again: unfortunately this actually means that
some of the most
Paul Seelig writes:
Myself i do prefer XEmacs over all other variants but wouldn't mind if
i had to install it later on my own.
I prefer emacs, bu I also wouldn't mind if i had to install it later on
my own. In fact, I would not mind at all if emacs was optional.
IMHO it would be much wiser
On Wednesday 27 January 1999, at 14 h 40, the keyboard of Paul Seelig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, i currently don't have any access to the sources of the boot
floppies and therefore don't know about the TODO list's contents.
You can get the last version by CVS:
:ext:[EMAIL
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 10:08:40AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wednesday 27 January 1999, at 14 h 40, the keyboard of Paul Seelig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What i'd like to see is something like profiles/Textprocessing for
the writing people containing the TeX system and
On Thursday 28 January 1999, at 11 h 23, the keyboard of Christian Meder
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I remember I made a pretty complete TeX profile when I created the profiles
for hamm. Isn't it there anymore ?
There is a TeX *task* (not a profile) of 201 Mb (it includes all the
dependencies,
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote:
I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the
installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good.
Getting the base system on is easy for someone
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 09:33:16AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
hamm was released with a pre-selections wrapper, where you could chose
certain sets of pre-selected packages. it works, but could use some
improvement and probably needs to be updated for slink - there's a good
place for you to
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 04:17:16PM -0500, Steve Dunham wrote:
M.C. Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would see this as a RH-style - so a rather bloated kernel which includes
lots of stuff as standard, and asks them the pertinent questions all at
once at the beginning, and then gets on
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 05:46:00PM -0800, Adam Klein wrote:
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 04:17:16PM -0500, Steve Dunham wrote:
Excuse me, but RedHat actually boots on my laptop because the kernel
is _less_ bloated than Debian's kernel. Debian's install disk doesn't
boot.
Ahem, _Which_ Debian's
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:00:06PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Shorter wrote:
Since when has the purpose of debian been to appease the interests
of the mass of unskilled consumers? There are lots of dists that are
trying to do that. I'm sure they will do a good
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:14:35PM +, thomas lakofski wrote:
As an experienced Debian user, I'll second these sentiments. Since
buzz I've been waiting for the Debian installation process to become
a (as it should be) 30 minute process, hopefully with some tools
included for mass
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
installation easier requires hard work. If it would be easy, it would have
been long done. The trick is to keep flexibility (and don't tell me SuSE is
flexibel). Doing it easy for the newbie and configurable for the experienced
user requires a well
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:51:25PM +, thomas lakofski wrote:
OK, since it seems that this kind of thing will probably only happen in a
commercial context, maybe it would make sense to arrange commercial
sponsorship of Debian in a bigger way.
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Shorter wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
installation easier requires hard work. If it would be easy, it would have
been long done. The trick is to keep flexibility (and don't tell me SuSE is
flexibel). Doing it easy for the newbie and
I did a fresh install yesterday from a hamm CD (our free
CheapBytes CD). I chose the scientifc workstation option. This
caused a minor nightmare. The only reason I was able to complete the
install is because I have a few hundred hours experience in
maintaining debian systems. I really
I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the
installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good.
Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on.
Probably not for a beginner.
John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tucson,AZ
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote:
I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the
installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good.
Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on.
Probably not for a
On 24 Jan 1999, John Lapeyre wrote:
I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the
installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good.
Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on.
Probably not for a beginner.
As someone who
M.C. Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would see this as a RH-style - so a rather bloated kernel which includes
lots of stuff as standard, and asks them the pertinent questions all at
once at the beginning, and then gets on with it.
Excuse me, but RedHat actually boots on my laptop because
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
The first thing a future Debian entrepreneur interested in financial
success would have to address would be to fix all those things which
we Debian propeller heads have preferred to mostly neglect up until
now: ease of install and
On 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote:
and annoyances they'd have with Debian. They won't care about
Debian's rather unaccessable technical superiority if the installation
hinders them from getting the beast at least easily up and running and
will recommend SuSE to the rest of the world. That's
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Shorter wrote:
Since when has the purpose of debian been to appease the
interests of the mass of unskilled consumers? There are lots of dists
that are trying to do that. I'm sure they will do a good job of
introducing newbies to Linux. But I never thought
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote:
Please don't let's start *this* kind of discussion yet again. It's
*not* about appeasing to the masses of unskilled consumers. It's
about increasing ease of installation, use and maintenance. Skilled
people definitely benefit from such time saving
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:14:35PM +, thomas lakofski wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote:
Can some focus be brought to getting there with similar ease? I've
been with Debian for over 2 years now and would be sad to have to
abandon it in the long run because of 'we don't do
thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making
these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe?
In the context of initial installation, I think it's laziness -- a
refusal to examine problems.
That said, the
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making
these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe?
In the context of initial installation, I think it's laziness --
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, thomas lakofski wrote:
I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making
these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe?
There is nothing wrong with making things easier. Simplicity
is an important technical value. But
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:51:25PM +, thomas lakofski wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making
these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe?
36 matches
Mail list logo
