On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 17:41 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Bruce, > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:49:13PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote: [snip] > > I'm skeptical to begin with of the benefits LCC has to offer Debian -- being > bound not just to an external *standard*, but to an external > *implementation* requires sacrificing autonomy in areas that have been > historically important to Debian, such as timely security fixes and > arch-specific fixes for architectures not covered by the LCC -- and the > wording from your original message set off a very large red flag for me > besides. Can you provide pointers to concrete LCC proposals of library > renames, so that I can get comfortable with the technical specifics of > what's really at issue here? You are way overreacting. Reread this, the last paragraph of BP's OP, a few times. "I would not suggest that Debian commit to using LCC packages at this time. We should participate for a while and see how many changes we'd have to make and whether the project works for us. But I think we should be at the table and in a position to in- fluence the project. The other members are willing to have us on those terms." Note the part about "I would not suggest that Debian commit to using LCC packages at this time." If Debian decides that it would not be in Debian's best interest to follow the LCC implementation, then guess what: it doesn't have to... -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "What other evidence do you have that they are terrorists, other than that they trained in these camps?" 17-Sep-2002 Katie Couric to an FBI agent regarding the 5 men arrested near Buffalo NY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part