future of smart

[Michael Jennings]

On Thursday, 12 June 2008, at 15:16:03 (-0700),
Grant McWilliams wrote:

> I'm not the only one relying on rpmforge. I don't think saying not
> to include it is the answer. It's nice to stand on ones soapbox and
> preach but some of us have a job to do so I have two solutions,
> create my own repo that includes everything that I need in rpmforge
> and maintain it myself or rely on them. Guess which one I'm going to
> do? The repos that are only moderately stable like atrpms I just
> disable or don't include at all but we rely on so many things in
> rpmforge that I'd probably have to choose a different distro without
> it.

And I'm saying you're pointing the finger in the wrong direction.
You're filling up your car from a pump that's dispensing water and
saying that Ford needs to change their engines to run on it.

I think the ability to lock one or the other package in place has
already been mentioned, so a reasonable solution does already exist.

Michael

-- 
Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX)  http://www.kainx.org/  <mej at kainx.org>
Linux Server/Cluster Admin, LBL.gov       Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will
  piss on your computer."                              -- Bruce Graham