On Jan 4, 2008 8:32 AM, <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > > >On Jan 4, 2008 7:16 AM, <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > >> Nevada. (Indiana, giving an incompatible user experience and scripting > >> experience is not such a release even if it aspires to be one) > > > >It is disingenuous at best to make such a claim when Indiana has made > >no such claim that it is, as of yet, trying to be such a compatible > >distribution. > > > >Such criticism is unproductive at best at this early stage, especially > >when it was made very clear that what was released is a prototype and > >nothing more. > > Any attempt to stifle criticism on a prototype "because it is a prototype" > has only one explanation which I can think of. > > What other purpose does a prototype serve?
That criticism would be welcome if it hadn't been made very plain that the areas being criticised were not final, had not yet been reviewed, and would be changing. Providing feedback to the project is one thing, publicly airing perceived grievances about things that have not yet been decided is another. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
