On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:37:15PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > In my opinion, it's much more practical and reasonable for there to be an > > agreement on consistent treatment of all packages, than for each Debian > > derivative to try to please individual maintainers with differing tastes on > > this subject. > > Your strategy seems to be to do something which pisses off almost > everyone who has been near it, with your excuse being that there is > not absolute unanimity on the alternative.
That simply isn't true, and taken at face value, it's insulting, because you attribute malicious intent. What I am doing is asking the Debian community for opinions on the appropriate thing for Debian derivatives to do. In response, you've been unnecessarily hostile, argumentative and accusatory. There's simply no cause for it. The most productive thing you could do in this situation would be to read my mail from last May and (politely and thoughtfully) answer the questions therein. Don't you realize how much easier it would be to ignore these issues entirely, rather than endure these harangues just for the sake of trying to collect information? Why do you think I would bother if I just wanted to piss you off? > Notice that there is no agreement that what you are doing now is > right, and to boot, it's contrary to the Debian policy manual too. Nonsense. What we are doing now amounts basically to inaction, is consistent with how Debian derivatives have worked in the past, and has no relevance whatsoever to the Debian policy manual. Please read the previous threads on this subject. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
