Re: Bug#88588: libpam-modules: pam-limits.so is broken
Sucking up to Branden? Or are you sucking up to Thomas Bushnell?
Regardless of why you posted, you asked some questions, I guess I should
answer. What I am WRT Debian is a long time user (~1996) who has gotten
sick of the idea that the DD is more important than the package. The fact
that you seem to think that the circumstances around what I say is more
important than what I say is a perfect example of this. As far as
credibility: I've stated this off list and on so often that it really
should be a FAQ. Write me off at your own peril: sometimes I say things
that are relevant. Often I'm the only one saying the relevant things
precisely because I'm abrasive: others would say it, but don't because
they don't want to hurt any feelings. My advice: hang around, you may
learn something...(but take a valium first if you're susceptible to high
blood pressure :)
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Adam McKenna wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 03:22:48PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
>> Logically, if it's been reported 10 times within 24 hours, it means that
>> 100 or so people found their system unsuitable (I've found that only about
>> 10% of the people who find bugs report them, precisely because of abuse
>> like this) within the same amount of time, and hundreds more will do so
>> before your fix gets out of incoming. That you'd release a broken package
>> is one thing, but the fact that you responded abusively and publicly to a
>> bug report sickens me. Is this the type of person that should be DPL?
>
>Hello,
>
>I'd personally like to know exactly what your involvement is with the
>project, besides making abrasive posts to the mailing lists.
>
>Also, I think you'd enjoy a slightly higher level of credibility among the
>readers of this list if you could leave the pseudonym(s) at the door.
>
>--Adam
>
>
--
FINE, I take it back: UNfuck you!
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: