Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 02:49:45PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andreas Barth (aba@not.so.argh.org) wrote:
> > * Chris Cheney (ccheney@cheney.cx) [040714 19:55]:
> > > The project is already self destructing due to lack of communication. I
> > > this particular case notice Daniel Silverstone admitted that ftpmaster
> > > had no intention to comment on the amd64 issue at all.
> > That is not true. Daniel didn't say that ftpmaster has no intention to
> > comment on the amd64 issue, but just that he has no interesst to
> > communicate with you (as a person) any more, because you cited
> > private, off-hand remarks. Please learn the difference between the two
> > statements.
> Is there some other way to get a remark from the ftpmasters on the
> issue? As rude as it may seem, it appears to have been much more
> effective in getting some comment on the issue than the other ways which
> have been tried.
> have to make it clear that they intended to make it public, as I'm sure
> tbm does either explicitly or implicitly.
So, thus far we've gotten the following remarks from the ftp-masters on
this issue:
- James finds it disheartening when people belliger ftp-masters
- Daniel feels abused and betrayed by Chris's entrapment
Which establishes that there are two ftp-masters who still have a pulse,
but otherwise doesn't speak to the issue at all; and I could've told you
that much anyway, if it even needed telling.
Explain to me again why this was a useful exercise?
> I do note that this is what tbm does to some extent,
> but he's pretty busy.
Interesting that the DPL gets a break for being pretty busy, but
ftp-masters get flame-broiled...
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
Reply to: