Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 07:47:37PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > Look, if you want to waste time, waste _yours_. OTOH, if you want to
> > take part in the discussion, do bother to address the issues you are
> > being presented with.
>
> I'd really LOVE to. But this is my discussion. If I don't take part in
> it, who will respond to all these bogus arguments some people enjoy
> sending in?
>
> Rather, this is you and the other trolls who are wasting my time.
Oh, I see: anybody who disagrees with you is a troll. That's
interesting.
> > Debian provides a _distribution_. In this context less is more. We
> > have a gazillion emacs (to pick a random example) packages because
> > there are _users_ for these packages who _do_ require the different
> > versions. This is not about "survival of the fittest", this is about
> > satisfying users' needs.
>
> Some people publicly said in this thread they like the package.
> Herbert said he likes it at least as an experiment. I got other
> private mails from well-known developers who like my proposal and pity
> your trolling attempts.
Oh, wow, I was wondering how long it would take for this to appear!
The lurkers support me in email
They all think I'm great don't you know.
You posters just don't understand me
But soon you will reap what you sow.
Lurkers, lurkers, lurkers support me, you'll see, you'll see
off in e-mail the lurkers support me, you'll see.
Oh it's true, and you know they support me.
There's thousands of lurkers out there!
They all understand my intentions
you posters are not being fair!
Lurkers etc.
The lurkers support me in email
"So why don't they post?" you all cry
They're scared of your hostile intentions
they're not as courageous as I.
Lurkers etc.
One day I'll round up all my lurkers
we'll have a newsgroup of our own
without all this flak from you morons
my lurkers will post round my throne.
Lurkers etc.
(credit to Jo Walton)
> > Let's have a look at the number of kernel-(image|source) packages for
> > i386, and let's just assume that your scheme succeeds and becomes the
> > preferred way of distributing Debian kernels, what would we have? The
> > following:
>
> I haven't even thought of my scheme as "becoming the preferred way of
> distributing Debian Linux". So I'll ignore your bogus hipothesis.
Why not call it "linux-experimental" or "linux-rmh" or similar then? I'm
sure a lot of people would be much happier with your proposal if it
didn't claim the important namespace of "linux", which implies that it
is the preferred kernel package.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: