From owner-freebsd-current Wed Sep 4 21:00:27 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA19205 for current-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA19199 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with SMTP id VAA18301 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 21:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA08131; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 20:56:12 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199609050356.UAA08131@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Latest Current build failure To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 20:56:12 -0700 (MST) Cc: rkw@dataplex.net, nate@mt.sri.com, current@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <5412.841891920@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Sep 4, 96 07:52:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I've tried very hard to explain to Richard that things just can't work > the way he wants them to You have explained this several ways. What you haven't explained is what, in the nature of the universe, causes this to be try. You explain *what*, but you do not explain *why*. I think David's posting came closest to the mark; he explained that there is inertia which favors the status quo (what), and then he explained what he saw as the reasons for the intertia (why). It's now up to Richard to explain how his plan addresses the reasons for the inertia. The inertia itself is a reactive force that operates on stimuli and on underlying assumptions. If the underlying assumptions can be disarmed, then there is no reason for the stimuli to elicit the same reaction as it would if they were in force. > Man, after picking my jaw up off the floor, you can bet your ass I'd > look at it. If it was really good stuff, you'd probably see me > jumping up in down in -hackers about an hour later screaming "Joe > Hacker for president! Joe Hacker for God!" > > Guess we'll just have to wait until Joe Hacker shows up! :-) Joe Hacker will be more likely to present his credentials if you will define what "good stuff" is, other than a value judgement at the time you are presented with a fait accompli. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.