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*
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 is
that the package is (to be) fixed. EOT.
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
 let's not argue about this, please? ;)