Matt Turner wrote: > >> And? Two wrongs don't make a right. > > > > What do you mean by "And?" - it doesn't make much sense as a reply. :\ > > He means that none of those provide justification.
It seemed that the main argument was that there are too few packages and then then I do think that other categories with few(er!) packages provide lots of justification. But in any case I too feel that number of packages is secondary to "what makes sense" AKA "a correct model".. > Are you being intentionally obtuse? Why would I? I'm making an effort to understand what was intended to be communicated, because what was actually communicated makes no sense to me. :\ //Peter
