James Lee <[email protected]> writes: > On 17/01/11, 15:48:33, Peter FELECAN <[email protected]> wrote regarding > Re: [csw-maintainers] [policy] files/dirs in /var/opt/csw: > >> > "most" isn't support. It's unsupported but if it works for the subset >> > of package you chose then I'm not going to stop you - until my package >> > breaks your system. >> > >> >> There are also gray cats. >> > >> > We've not made a rule about cats. > >> This is a way to say that a manichean attitude is a little bit >> rigid. Manichean is when you say "'most' isn't support". Non manichean >> is when 'most' is support with exceptions and corresponding documented >> warnings. With all due respect I think that this is a finicky >> discussion. Nobody talks here about ayatollish absolute support except >> if we wish to stay in the pure Persian tradition. > > You in particular have been complaining about discretion in the CSW > process. If you don't like a rule don't make it. I do hope those that > drove the democratic decision actually understood the issues, else, in > the best tradition of referenda, we'd better try again until we get the > right answer.
This is non sense because: - I was complaining about *past* opacity and obscurity - I like the rule and proud to participate in it's making - people making up our community have the required intelligence to understand the issues at stake - the tradition to which you refer was anti-democratic, e.g. European Constitution and all, i.e. referendum says no and parliament says yes, in France, Netherlands and Ireland at least. > I'm completely at ease with not supporting NFS, but don't pretend it's > supported when we have policies that contradict it. This discussion being hopeless I let you have as many "last words" as you wish and ending my contribution to this thread. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
