On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 10:13:24PM -0600, Larry 'Daffy' Daffner wrote: > It really would be nice in the future if fair warning was given before > major changes such as this were made that had the potential to break a > wide variety of things, so that people can decide if the risk level is > appropriate for their system. For the most part, unstable has been > relatively safe for a non-critcal system, where it's desired that the > system remain mostly useful. Then a whack on the nose like this comes > along. It would be highly unfortunate if the only testing that > unstable got was on systems that only see use as test systems, but > making a change like this without warning appears to be the first > salvo in making that an unfortunate reality. Fair warning WAS given. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE The Source Comes First! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I wonder if this is the first constitution in the history of mankind where you have to calculate a square root to determine if a motion passes. :-)" -- Seen on Slashdot
Attachment:
pgpoEl5n6EIut.pgp
Description: PGP signature