Paul Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 10:03 -0400, Barclay, Daniel wrote: >> Paul Johnson wrote: >>> On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 16:19 +1000, CaT wrote: >>> >>>> I believe that would be the point the original poster was getting >> at. If >>>> aptitude is really doing that then it is in the wrong. >>> I understood it, but given that this is how apt has always worked >> and is >>> documented to work, why change it now? >> Because it's error-prone. Because it's a poor-quality design. > > Might want to check yourself before you wreck yourself: The same could > be said for your HTML-spewing MUA. >
Please, it is pointless to make an ad hominem argument. He does have a valid point if you look at if from software users' point of view. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
