Alexander Yurchenko wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 09:05:13PM +1300, Richard Toohey wrote:
On 9/02/2009, at 6:31 PM, Thomas Pfaff wrote:
I think this could use some explaining for those of us that are not
intimately involved in development or have been around here for that
long. Keeping it small and simple by saying no to adding one file
at 7.2K? I'd really like to know the rationale on this one.
Thanks.
My guess would be that I want this 10K util, you want that 7.2K util,
Fred wants that 20K util, and every Tom, Dick, and Harry wants
their n K ... who gets to make the rules, who gets to administer it,
etc.?
(Who gets to listen to everyone arguing why this or that should go in?)
And guess there may be ramifications for install media?
you need wake(8) on install media to wake up your local ftp mirror?
I can't say the rational for it. Judging by the reaction to the addition
and removal, I guess many would use it too. We can only plea to make the
removal reverse, that's all we can do. I can only say many times we are
told you can leave xbase for example as hard disk is cheap, well that
should apply to this very nice tool too. Looks to me that by the number
of quick changes done to it between the changes and the removal by a few
different developers and the original OK list of a few more and nice
comments about it, looks like many would welcome it too.
We can only plea to the power to be to change their mind, but that's
about it. What I find harsh is the comments made to Marc on undeadly
about his removal. He didn't deserved them by a long shut!
I have to say it's hard to understand when it's always about the right
tool for the job and this is right. However, be as it may. We can only
suggest to have it back, however, it's not up to us, nor do we have a
say in it in the end either.
We don't know the reason, nor do we need to know. The outcome is sad
however for sure and obviously many looks like would use it and welcomed it.
But I must admit, it's somewhat difficult to understand the statement
about "bin being full".
May be a security possible issue, but if it does only provide wake, then
what's the harm in turning up an already up server. (;>
Hopefully this could be reconsider?
If not, thanks anyway to may be review the removal.
Best,
Daniel
