Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:47:47 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: WTF?! Message-ID: <20010920134747.A741@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3BAA1E5B DOT B468E7E1 AT syntrex DOT com> <3BAAB410 DOT 3403 DOT 45ED99B AT localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3BAAB410.3403.45ED99B@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 03:29:20AM +1000, Robert Praetorius wrote: >perhaps if the main cygwin mailing list were renamed to cygwin- >asbestos-longjohns ( http://www.cnam.fr/Jargon/jargon.html?64 ) >it would set expectations in a way that would cut down the level >of shock and surprise (I'm not shocked, but I'm pretty much in >agreement with http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart- >questions.html ). > >Naahhh. Nothing would be sufficient. This is life on the net. >The unacculturated proportion of the stream never goes down >because of the continual influx. Wow. That's a discouraging (if true) observation. I think the usual observation at this point is "If you really think that those are flames you don't know what flames are". I think it may be time for a "death of cygwin unless changes are made" prediction, too. Or did we already have that? cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/