| 1 |
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 00:50 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:42:28 +0100 |
| 3 |
> Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > you shoot down solutions |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Maybe it wasn't a very good solution that deserved to be shot down. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Maybe it was; what is needed here, is the feedback that makes it better. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Work towards a very good solution deserves more than a plain /dev/null; |
| 13 |
> if they end up in /dev/null when provided, solutions appear unwelcome. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Constructivism has to come from both sides to have an useful discussion. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Your "suggestion" was expanding the "arm" keyword to "armv4-linux", |
| 19 |
"armv5-linux", "armv6-linux", "armv6-hardfloat-linux", |
| 20 |
"armv7-softfp-linux", "armv7-hardfloat-linux", |
| 21 |
"armv7-hardfloat-uclibc-linux" - that is nowhere near a good solution. |
| 22 |
The /dev/null comment was about wanting others to do the work and not |
| 23 |
contributing anything more than (imo) a stupid idea - if you aren't |
| 24 |
willing to put in the work, don't expect others to. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
And yes, I see what you mean now re: my reply seeming off - it would |
| 28 |
seem when I hit group reply, for some reason, Evolution is putting Peter |
| 29 |
Stuge into the CC, and not Tom Wijsman (despite hitting group reply from |
| 30 |
your email. Maybe there should have been more testing of Gnome 3.8 |
| 31 |
before it was stabled on x86... |
Archives