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