Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
Robert Millan <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:56:38AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>> As an academic exercise this is fine and dandy, but having two
>> competing packagings of the same _basic_ component can't do us any
> This isn't a "competing" package. As I said before, the standard way Linux
> kernel packaging is handled is "a good choice for the power user". I don't
> intend to "replace" it or the like, just add more options for the people who
> like them.
Having options for the sake of having options is, frankly, a hideously
stupid design doctrine. Whose life will this package make easier? As
a user, I have never been confused by Debian's "normal" Linux kernel
packages. What specific benefits would your proposed package offer?