On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:57:45 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > Afterall, there's still the same hypocrisy in threads like this, no signs > > > of actual cooperation or collaboration, but only attempts at influencing a > > ========================= > > > project's decisions from the outside without getting involved. > > ============================================================== > > > > > The only difference in how I've changed is that I am not involved in EPEL, > > ========================= > > > so feel free to agree on something without my blessing. ;) > > > > OK, so you admit that it's a bad thing to influence a project from the > > outside when you're not involved, and you are not involved, but try to > > influence the project's decisions on fedora-usermgmt and repotags. > > > > Hm, now is it me or is there a blatant contradiction in the above? Or > > are you just saying that you're doing bad things and enjoy them? ;) > > Uh, come on, twisting words like that is a poor style. Simple underlining can't be considered twisting. > Now, perhaps you've focused on attacking me blindly again, so let me make > this clear. I don't request anything. I voice my concerns. What makes you think I enjoy attacking you blindly? And you voiced your concerns quite enough times, we all got it. > You will enjoy the next sentence, since it is food for your > rhetorical exercises, and you will rub your hands when you read > it. ;) I have no particular interest in seeing fedora-usermgmt being > used in EPEL packages. Rip this sentence out of context if you like > to. But don't forget that I only participated in the discussion to > correct some untruths that have been written about it. No, I already supected that all you wanted are endless threads w/o any particular interest in either topic. > WRT repotags it is similar. Indeed ... > Go ahead and add them if you see the benefit. Who cares about an > upgrade path between RHEL4 and RHEL5 anyway? ;) Even with the smiley I really fail to see the joke. > The thing that concerns me is the relevance to Fedora. Just in case you misunderstood, no one suggested adding repotags to Fedora. > There are people from Fedora committees involved in these > discussions. And they ought to know better before they introduce > mandatory repotags, disttags and other unclean solutions. Indeed I'm one of them in favour of clean disttags and repotags. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpl78IDuVYVi.pgp
Description: PGP signature