Dave Boynton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My vote goes to NOT require even the X libraries in the base system. Not > due to any concern of disk space, but the possibility that some lame-oid > Micro$oft-like company will ship a product without adequate command line > tools.
This is an extremely poor argument against including X in the spec. There is nothing we can do to prevent anyone from shipping low quality software, and we gain nothing by not spec'ing X. <rant> When you refer to other companies and their products, especially Microsoft and Windows, refrain from munging the name in an effort to poke fun (e.g. Micro$oft, Winblows, etc.). This is just plain childish, and does nothing for the cause you would advocate and nothing against what you oppose. Instead, it only serves as an example to others that people who advocate the same things you do must alwso be childish, and leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. If you feel the need to advocate something (and I certainly advocate advocacy), instead of trying to put the competition down, put your side up, present your virtues rather than their flaws. Everyone will be happier. </rant> -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://jakob.kaivo.net/
