| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> posted |
| 2 |
20090213235351.381cffcd@snowmobile, excerpted below, on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 |
| 3 |
23:53:51 +0000: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
[>> > Luca Barbato wrote...] |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
>> >> Then if you continued to read you'll notice that |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> > ...you got so incoherent I gave up |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Relying to offense because I just pointed out something you dislikes |
| 12 |
>> since you cannot find a argumentative way reply isn't exactly polite or |
| 13 |
>> mature. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> No. Really. Again. You've been steadily talking nonsense on this whole |
| 16 |
> issue. Please step back, start again and clearly and concisely explain |
| 17 |
> in coherent English how you solve the simple example I gave earlier in |
| 18 |
> the thread. I am far from the only person who hasn't managed to work out |
| 19 |
> your explanation of this simple case so far. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
FWIW, while I'd not choose "incoherent" and "nonsense" as those are |
| 22 |
loaded terms that don't tend to make a productive debate if that is |
| 23 |
intended, I lost Luca's argument at this point as well. Now if it was |
| 24 |
just me I'd believe it was simply over my head. However, if a lead |
| 25 |
developer of one of our three package managers gets lost as well, maybe |
| 26 |
it isn't him, and maybe it isn't me. Somewhere, the logic thread simply |
| 27 |
got too difficult to follow and we're both lost. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
So Luca, I'd appreciate it too if you tried again from this point in the |
| 30 |
original stub-quoted above, as I really am trying to follow this. I |
| 31 |
don't have a position on this but I'd like to. =:^) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 35 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 36 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives