Re: how to make Debian less fragile (long and philosophical)
I had originally suggest that it should be important because Debian
policy says that anything an experienced Unix administrator would
expect to have should go into important. I said that an experienced
Unix admin would expect some static recovery tools.
Personally, my goal is to see it go into systems by default when people
ask for an ordinary install, and if that will happen just as well with
a "standard" designation as an "important" one, then I am not really
concerned which it is.
Justin
On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 01:06:41PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Richard" == Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl> writes:
>
> Richard> Do we have a consensus that sash should be priority "important"?
>
> Could you synopsize for me why imporant is better suited than
> standard?
>
> manoj
> --
> A little dog goes into a saloon in the Wild West, and beckons to the
> bartender. "Hey, bartender, gimme a whiskey." The bartender ignores
> him. "Hey bartender, gimme a whiskey!" Still ignored. "HEY BARMAN!!
> GIMME A WHISKEY!!" The bartender takes out his six-shooter and shoots
> the dog in the leg, and the dog runs out the saloon, howling in
> pain. Three years later, the wee dog appears again, wearing boots,
> jeans, chaps, a Stetson, gun belt, and guns. He ambles slowly into
> the saloon, goes up to the bar, leans over it, and says to the
> bartender, "I'm here t'git the man that shot muh paw."
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
> Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: