1 |
On 14 March 2012 23:44, Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Oh, and somehow "consensus" will work? No, sorry, it will not. |
3 |
|
4 |
No, logical analysis will, as I said in the rest of my post which you |
5 |
conveniently ignored - either we conclude with evidence that there are |
6 |
no issues, which should settle the matter for reasonable people, or we |
7 |
discover that there are, in which case they have to be dealt with one |
8 |
way or another. I really don't see how anyone can object to that, |
9 |
unless they're worried they won't like the result.... |
10 |
|
11 |
> How about the basic FACT that today, such systems do not work |
12 |
|
13 |
This is debatable at best. You can keep screaming "but bluetooth |
14 |
won't work!" until you're blue in the face, but that's not relevant at |
15 |
all to people who don't use bluetooth. |
16 |
|
17 |
> and are not supported by a wide range of packages we support today. |
18 |
|
19 |
Isn't such support being removed by the same people who keep arguing |
20 |
that it's already not supported? That's like cutting half your |
21 |
employees' pay, and then insisting that you have to choice but to cut |
22 |
the other half's pay as well, in order to be fair. |
23 |
|
24 |
> Yes, some people are "lucky" in that their systems don't have those |
25 |
> packages, but others are not. The simple "I use a bluetooth keyboard" |
26 |
> is one such example. |
27 |
|
28 |
People who only have a bluetooth keyboard can set their systems up in |
29 |
such a way that it works, just like how people who have / on lvm can |
30 |
set their systems up in such a way that that works. That's not in |
31 |
itself a reason to force it on everyone. |
32 |
|
33 |
> It is strange to watch people somehow think that if they complain |
34 |
> enough, or feel strongly enough, something is going to change here to |
35 |
> make this basic fact go away. |
36 |
|
37 |
If by "the basic fact" you mean that plenty of people are quite happy |
38 |
doing what's worked just fine for years, then yes. |