>>>>> "Steve" == Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes:
Steve> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 04:33:21AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> Steve, let's take a step back and calm down.
>> Are you saying that your objection to engineering a solution
>> where dash doesn't need to be essential is that it's not worth
>> the effort? I *think* that was the point of your message but
>> am not entirely sure.
Steve> Yes, that's definitely my position.
OK, I'm fine with that. I jumped into this mess because several
people asserted that we were making dash essential because it was
technically required. As best I can tell that is false. It seems
like there was a lot of not listening going on, and a lot of throwing
around assertions about what is and is not possible without actually
any attention to the accuracy of those assertions. That makes me
grumpy and so I got involved.
I'm happy with the answer of "making dash essential is easier than not doing so
and we have not seen a compelling reason to do something else."
Steve> From what I can see,
Steve> engineering a solution where dash doesn't need to be
Steve> essential isn't worth *any* effort, because IMHO, so far
Steve> the arguments for being able to remove dash from the system
Steve> appear entirely contrived.
I think you're being unfair here. There are arguments about technical
cleanlyness and design esthetics that seem reasonable. I don't see
that these arguments appear contrived. I'm happy to agree with you
though that these arguments don't justify the work.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
