Re: wterm in potato
On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 10:59:03PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> I'd bet a significant sum that the RM didn't actually look very close at
> the bug or the fix, but only the priority, assuming that the bug reporter
> and/or package maintainer had ensured that it was set correctly.
Unless he says otherwise, that's not what happened. :)
> I'd be more concerned if we didn't have 19 other term programs that *do*
> work.
OTOH, if there are another 19 working X terminal emulators, why should
anyone complain if one buggy one is removed? ;>
Remember that you not having a package available doesn't mean it gets
removed from users' machines... also, the package stayed in unstable.
Anyway, this discussion isn't getting us anywhere, what's important[1] is
that the package is (to be) fixed. EOT.
--
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
[1] let's not argue about this, please? ;)
Reply to: