----- Original Message -----
From: Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 01 June, 2002 10:19
Subject: Re: [ql-users] May the 'Source' be with you, but not me ...
>
> In article <003901c20951$3ee82f40$5a065cc3@default>, Dilwyn Jones
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >
> >> I am terribly bored with the SMSQ/E 'Source' discussions ... any
> >chance
> >> of the details going 'off list' until there is something definite to
> >> report ?
> >
> >Isn't it the kind of discussion which could go onto ql-developers
> >list?
> >
> >While the whole issue of the sources needs to be sorted, it's in great
> >danger of being counter productive at the moment. Too many people
> >getting p***ed off with the length and impenetrable detail and legal
> >argument.
>
> ... I thought I was not alone :-)
>
You're not ! I find myself making generous use of "delete".with both "Source"
and "... Proposals." _without_ reading.
> --
> Malcolm Cadman
