On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 08:54 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:47 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:33 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > > Where do you see somebody proposing that no updates be issued? Where do > > > you see somebody proposing a setup where fixing a graphics card can't be > > > done in the stable release kernel? You've built up a nice strawman that > > > you've lovingly kicked down. > > > > It's implicit in what Jon said; I was pointing out that he was, possibly > > inadvertently, suggesting a principle that was far too strict. > > IMO if hardware enablement can be done at no risk, then ok. But as Jesse I wasn't really talking about the topic of the argument, it was more of a meta-post on how the argument is being conducted. There's already clearly (at least) two schools of thought and compromising between them would be very difficult. If either or both schools start supporting their arguments with categorical statements like "as if waiting six months really mattered in the real world", it's only going to make it harder. In a discussion like this it's only possible to come to a vaguely workable compromise without everyone hating each other if you at least acknowledge that the other point of view has some validity too, even if it's not the one you share. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
