From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 4 10:28:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA27044 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 10:28:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (hokkshideh.jetcafe.org [207.155.21.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27037 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 10:28:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dave@hokkshideh.jetcafe.org) Received: from hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA24571; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 10:27:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199711041827.KAA24571@hokkshideh.jetcafe.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0delta 6/3/97 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Gary Kendall , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mv /usr/src/games /dev/null - any objections? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 10:27:51 -0800 From: Dave Hayes Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk "JKH" == Jordan K Hubbard writes: >> > It's not a question of what you like, >> Of course. You asked for objections, and how -dare- I suggest a >> preference? What -was- I thinking? After all, I'm just a user. > You are quoting this out of context. As I said, "It's not a > question of what you like, it's a question of how to distribute this > stuff .." Context or not, look at the subject line. You asked for objections, I object to the freeware games not coming standard with FreeBSD. I cited the reasons as "I like those games". I do realize you have what you think are good reasons to remove all the games. > You think we like dealing with this twice in > 6 months? You don't think it might be prudent, given the low > benefit-to-risk ratio of /usr/src/games, to take steps to simply > avoid a repetition of this problem in a known trouble spot? There's our disagreement. You don't perceive games as a benefit. I do. >> So let me get this straight. You -presume- I've had too little >> experience, so because of this you are going to define me as not >> being able to provide a requested opinion? > Again, let me clarify: You and several others in this discussion > haven't really been providing "the requested opinion" so much as > you've been taking the opportunity to give me a fair bit > questionable legal advice ("just fuck the lawyers, man!") But I'm not a lawyer, nor was my contribution intended as legal advice (regardless of how you perceived it). I was simply questioning, admittedly in a backhanded way, the need to overreact based on a laywer letter. Yes, I think you are overreacting. No, you don't have to care that I think so. > which I have been reacting to with semi-vitriolic paragraphs like > the above rather than being able to spend the time more > constructively discussing the real issue here, which is how to deal > with this situation now and in the conceivable future, not just for > "boggle" today. You'll do what you think is right of course. All I can do is suggest that you not get rid of rogue, larn, and the other freeware games. > Perhaps I should have chosen a different subject, considering what > the post which accompanied it segued into. You are quite on the mark there. Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it. :) ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet "Mulla, your donkey has disappeared!" "Thank goodness I wasn't on it at the time, otherwise I would have disappeared too!"