* Branden Robinson said: > > several lines? If so, then please go back AND READ IT. Only then you have a > > right to jump upon me like that. Before you joined the discussion, we were > > DISCUSSING matters, now we're FIGHTING and flaming each other. Thank you. > > What is there to discuss with you? Your entire position can be boiled down Probably nothing... > to a paraphrase of Henry Ford: > > "You can rewrite dpkg in any language you want, as long as it's C." Oh no.... I never said it... You're the next person to accuse me of it. I think I really have nothing to say then... I'm sorry, I wasted your time. > I'm sorry it offends your aesthetic that Aaron plans to reimplement dpkg in NO IT DOESN'T! Have I made myself clear THIS TIME? It doesn't as I myself program in BOTH languages - I just try to forsee what MIGHT be better. That's what discussion is for. And if Aarond didn't want to discuss his idea why would he send this posting? Wasn't it better to write the code and then show it?? I think I'm getting wrong all of it here, maybe I'm just stupid... > C++. But it is not your decision to make. Gosh... > The best support you can provide for your arguments is to redesign and > reimplement the Debian packaging system yourself (or with people you > recruit to the task). So get to work. I'm sorry, why are you attacking me? I wasn't the one who said he wants to redesign the package. I responded to a posting posted to a PUBLIC mailing list, that's it. Not even once I said here that I want to redesign it. I just had my doubts and wanted to share them with you all - if that's a crime, then I'm sorry - I'm guilty. It seems that one can express his ideas and doubts as long as they are the same as of the original poster... sorry for wasting your time, just ignore postings with my name on them regards, marek
Attachment:
pgpaK_C06iVRM.pgp
Description: PGP signature