From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 18 08:27:15 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C7D16A4B3; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from amsfep11-int.chello.nl (amsfep11-int.chello.nl [213.46.243.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDFE243FD7; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:27:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dodell@sitetronics.com) Received: from sitetronics.com ([213.46.142.207]) by amsfep11-int.chello.nl (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20030918152705.ZPSM4496.amsfep11-int.chello.nl@sitetronics.com>; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:27:05 +0200 Message-ID: <3F69CE7E.6050801@sitetronics.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:25:50 +0200 From: "Devon H. O'Dell" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: Michal Pasternak cc: Nik Clayton Subject: Re: Sorry about sysinstall. X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:27:15 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: >>situation that could be engineered against anyway, but even >>if it wasn't, will probably never occur. >> >> > It's assinine to limit something because of a hypothetical > > >It's assinine to make bogus, unfounded statements about the >developers on the mailing lists and their responses to bug >reports. > > Look, otherwise why don't we set up a freebsd-flames list? What we need now is more productivity and less bitching/whining/moaning/etc. I'm sure this has been said on numerous lists, numerous times. Whose idea was this? Can we get a more structured plan about: a) What the installation system would entail b) A mock-up of what it'd look like c) What packages would be installed for the desktop d) What desktop system would be 'supported' (personally, I like the freedom to choose anyway, perhaps including screenshots of nicely configured available WMs is something to do if we're going to *really* *truly* do this) e) Other related miscellany Once a preliminary plan is drawn up, we can start determining how and what to implement. I know several people here (including myself) would feel free to donate bandwidth to the cause. Hell, I'd even donate a good bit of coding time in C ;). How about we cut the crap and give structured criticisms instead of yakking about people flaming and then flaming back. The sarcasm is really unnecessary, folks. --Devon P.S. If you feel the need to deem any of this as 'assinine' or determine that it'd be constructive to throw some sarcastic replies back to me, feel free to NOT send the reply to the list. I'm sure that nobody else cares if you think I'm an idiot.