From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Apr 9 11:32:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.unixathome.org (ns1.unixathome.org [203.79.82.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2837037B422 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 11:32:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from xeon (xeon.int.nz.freebsd.org [192.168.0.18]) by ns1.unixathome.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f39IWFe73318; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 06:32:31 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 06:32:15 +1200 (NZST) From: Dan Langille X-X-Sender: To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: Subject: Re: Releases In-Reply-To: <20010409111527V.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > OK. But if you didn't want to be involved in the first place, you > > should have stayed out of it. > > [Best "cool hand Luke" voice] "Son, what we have here is a failure to > communicate!" > > The fact that I think this is a waste of time and you're on a fool's > errand is certainly something I'm free to communicate. I just wish you'd said that in the first place! Yeah, I know you did, but in far many more words. > The fact that > I feel that way is also good reason for me to suggest that you do the > work if you're hell-bent on proving me wrong - that's a time-honored > and more than acceptable way of delivering your rebuttal. I have > been as "involved" in this discussion as I needed to be, thanks. AFAIK, the thread to date has been about whether or not [something like] the label "-development" would cause less confusion than "-current". My objective is not to prove anyone wrong or right but to solve a problem which occurs again and again. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message