First let me say Bruce, you've done a great job in the past, and I realize it's been no easy task. You've taken a lot of uncalled for flack recently, mostly due to misconceptions and pointless debates. When the time comes, I hope you decide to continue as the project leader.
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: > On 21 Aug 1997 23:28:31 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >George Bonser writes: > >> I think the idea is, you buy the 1.3 CDROM and pick up the revisions from > >> the net. > >> ... > >> In this way, if a distribution goes defunct and is replaced, only the > >> X.x-updates directory needs to be left around for people that might want > >> to update a disk that is a couple of revs behind current. > > > >Excellent idea. Just add a script for the user to run to automatically > >update their installed packages and you've got a really slick system. > > If you have a net connection. If you are only working from one machine. Then > it > doesn't matter. If I have to s=do several machines I order an current rev > CD-R. The > problem is I can;t be sure exactly what I will be getting. Is it 1.3.1 R2 > from this > week, or from last week. What about next week? a) If you don't have a net connection, what difference does it make if you have r 1 or 2 or 3. They are only minor bug fixes only (I'm not sure if major bug fixes constitue a new distribution number). b) If you are so concerned as to what release you get, get it from a cd-r seller. I have a feeling major cd makers will release 2.0, and never 2.0 r1. c) Packages within the release don't change. A set of packages is left for testing, and once we have enough packages, a release is made and the remaining packages are left till the next release. The actual implementation is being discussed elsewhere, and once something is decided upon, I'm sure everyone will be informed. If someone has _actual proof_ of this statement being wrong, please correct me. > >However, it was my understanding that the change from x.y.z to x.y revision > >z was purely cosmetic. > > Apparently not. Then I don't think you understand the change. I didn't understand it myself at first, but Bruce informed me of the method of revisions, and this has since been posted on the list in a clearer way. Why are you so upset about this? If it's that big of a deal, go make your own distribution. Everything seems to be working fine with this one. If you aren't going to contribute to debian, please don't make it your goal to disrupt what we have done. I guess the analogy I'm trying to make is: when you get a birthday cake with white icing, do you throw a fit because it's not chocolate? Be happy that someone made you a cake, in fact you should be thanking them for it. There are times when a criticism will help us grow. I don't think this is one of those times. Thanks to Bruce and all the other developers who have put together this wonderful distribution. Brandon -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
