On So, 20 Okt 2013, Brad Barnett wrote:
> I view this bug as very high priority. I see more than a decade of
> documentation out there, and of user experience familiar with a process.
>
> A process that changed for code correctness, and for absolutely no other
> reason.
>
> A process than in changing, broke the existing process.
>
> And when the process that breaks the existing method is used, the user
> wonders 'huh?!'.. and consults the man page. The doc dirs. And they see
> that what they did should be correct... and wonder 'What did I do wrong,
> I followed the docs?'
Nothing to add but - I agree.
> A user that will spend countless hours trying to figure out what went
> wrong -- often without a network connection.
I was exactely in this situation.
Whatever apt maintainers believe is the right thing, breaking
tons of documentation of many years is plain wrong.
ANyway, wasn't it Debian that said something
"For the users" and "priority"
I guess that meant
Our priority is to break it for the users.
Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
