On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Les wrote: >On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 14:09 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Tuesday 15 May 2007, David Fletcher wrote: >> >At 12:31 15/05/2007, you wrote: >> >>http://www.oreillynet.com/linux/blog/2007/03/where_fedora_went_wrong.htm >> >>l >> >> >> >>What are your comments? I feel simillar. >> >> >> >>-- >> >>http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/ >> >>linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless >> >>registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, >> >> http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241 >> >>Skype: valent.turkovic >> >> >> >>-- >> >>fedora-list mailing list >> >>fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx >> >>To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >> > >> >I have to agree too. >> > >> >Like I said in reply to Gene's posting about three hours ago, I'm >> >annoyed that something that was functioning perfectly (on FC5) a few >> >days ago is now screwed up and not working. To the extent that this >> >morning I've wiped Fedora from the hard drive of the office computer >> >and installed Dapper Drake. After running the updates and setting the >> >screen resolution, when I plug a flash drive into a USB socket it >> >mounts it and puts an icon to the drive on the desktop i.e. it "just >> >works" like FC5 used to but now does not. As the blog says this must >> >be down to a lack of attention to detail and not properly testing >> >updates before they are sent out i.e. human error. >> > >> >I doubt whether fixing things like this will now be receiving much >> >priority with the F7 release being imminent, which is a shame. IMHO >> >there is nothing wrong with using a fast moving distribution like >> >Fedora, but when a version is getting towards the end of its life it >> >should be left alone in a fully working state that we can continue to >> >use until ready to upgrade. >> > >> >Dave F >> >> I have to violently agree with these thoughts Dave. I've questioned if >> this is not some tactic to get us to upgrade by destroying the install we >> are currently running, just so they have a freshly minted test laboratory >> again. >> >> Maybe that's being paranoid, but the facts certainly suggest it to anyone >> with a 3 digit IQ. > >Darn, No wonder I don't understand ;-) > >Regards, >Les H Another point, obvious to the watcher but largely unspoken Les, simply because its assumed by most of us. So let me state it: There probably isn't anybody on this list with less than a 3 digit IQ, for the simple reason that, generally speaking 2 digit IQ's are going to be either computer illiterate, or M$ sheeple. From watching this list for the last 5 or 6 years, there have been quite a few messages posted here that indicate that not only did the poster have a 3 digit IQ, the first digit wasn't a 1, and sometimes I get the feeling its at least a 3, or more. All are 'potential' Mensa members. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) No man is useless who has a friend, and if we are loved we are indispensable. -- Robert Louis Stevenson
