On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 12:07:10PM -0500, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 05:17:31PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote: > > > > Ignoring the rest of the email, and just singling out this one > > statement, which is mostly about describing the position from which i > > am looking at this situation, is also not too productive. > > Yes, I could've replied to the entire mail, in which you restate > everything you've previously said, and restated everything I've > previously said (as well as everything Peter's previously said). But > what's the point?
You must be confusing this with some other discussion or mail-thread apparently. Only the first and last statements in that email that you are supposed to be referring to are things i have been constantly hammering on. The things in between are actual counter-arguments/questions raised on the arguments stated in Peters previous email. In the last statement i made, i wondered about the lack of defendable arguments. Your diversion is not exactly helping. Luc Verhaegen. _______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
