On 17261 March 1977, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
1. Nobody really opposes what is being proposed.
The opposition is against technical details and the refusal to adjust. Not against the actual thing.
4. I understand Sean (and Ian, I pressume) are pushing this GR to solve a stalemate while negotiating with ftp-masters regarding implementation details, or something like that. In such case, I would have expected an ftp-master to explain what is so difficult in accepting the new proposed tool/workflow.
I just tried to, in another mail in a new subthread. Including that the GR proposal took me by surprise, as the last discussion *I* can find is long ago.
In other words: Is there and underlying controversy? Or is it just we enjoy poking each other?
Nah, we just don't enjoy getting our points ignored when asked and then years later a hammer to overwrite.
This is one of the mails that actually point nowhere, and I fear are not as constructive... I sat a bit with it half-written, pondering whether to send it or to delete it. I am deciding to send it because the interaction patterns we are seeing are quite pathological. I'm sending this mail as a call, not only not to tell the other party to fsck off some filesystems, but to stop finger-pointing and second-guessing.
There *IMO* was one subthread going a particular bad way, where, even after getting pointed out multiple times that the taken conclusion was *WRONG*, text still went the wrong way, but the rest of it I found quite useful/OK. Many of them mails gave me more insight into t2u and ideas around it. -- bye, Joerg
