On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 06:31 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 23:15 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]: > > > > I think that tying core Debian packages to the Red Hat boat anchor is a > > > > horrible, horrible idea. > > > > > > I tend to agree with sentiments like this, but didn't Bruce mention > > > that we could participate in this organization even if we didn't take > > > their packages? That is, perhaps we could influence the direction to > > > a more useful one? > > > > > > If that is the case, it seems zero risk to me. > > > > Then we would be non-participants, we would be just bitchers, telling > > everybody how fucked-up their process and QA are. We would gain > > nothing, and we would lose as everybody would say that Debian refuses > > to play together with the guys after giving an initial 'yes'. And no, > > no ISV would certify Debian just because Debian sits and bitches. > > There are diplomatic ways to say, "your processes and QA are all > fucked up". > > We'll just have to send someone who knows how to do that. :)
And just who the he(double-toothpick) would you suggest? Scott James Remnant? >:^) -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
