From owner-freebsd-current Sat Aug 2 15:48:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA19473 for current-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.scsn.net (scsn.net [206.25.246.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA19468 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:48:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rhiannon.scsn.net ([208.133.153.36]) by mail.scsn.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-32322U5000L100S10000) with ESMTP id AAA135; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 18:38:30 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by rhiannon.scsn.net (8.8.6/8.8.5) id SAA02615; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 18:46:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19970802184536.51442@scsn.net> Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 18:45:36 -0400 From: "Donald J. Maddox" To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued Reply-To: dmaddox@scsn.net References: <19970802165908.37359@scsn.net> <16478.870558484@time.cdrom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.79 In-Reply-To: <16478.870558484@time.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 02:48:04PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 02:48:04PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > No, I was stating that this was a *problem* in this discussion and > that debating it on purely technical terms would miss that crucial > point, not that emoting had some intrinsic value in this debate. I > was in no way trying to suggest that you should get all emotional in > turn - stick to your technical points, please. :-) How can one stick to the technical points while simultaneously somehow implicitly acknowledging that this is not strictly a technical issue? I don't know enough linguistic contortions to manage an email like that. > Yes, and that's your opinion. Others have dissenting opinions or > there would be no debate here. I'm just trying to make the point that > pounding on the desk with your shoe is no way to bring the other side > into agreement. Agreed, emphatically... But there _was_ no debate on this issue, at least none in a public forum. Tcl8.x just appeared out of nowhere. (Actually, just prior to this, I was laboring under the apparent misap- prehension that tcl was finally about to be removed from the base distibution.)