John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Well there's an obvious discrepancy then, since MANY other programs in > > > the same boat are already in main, and have been for some time. > > > > Yes, because I didn't accept them. This thread only started because I > > happened to look at TiK while processing Incoming. I am *not* picking > > on TiK here. As I've already said, and I'll thank you kindly to stop > > trolling that I am. > > I'm not trying to troll here. I'm just pointing out that there is a > glaring inconsistency in the treatment of packages.
*sigh*. No, there is not. I did not accept the other packages. I am being perfectly consistent. This is the first package that I have review from Incoming of this sort; that's all, nothing more, nothing less. -- James
