This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 15:10:21 -0400
- Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
- References: <80575AFA5F0DD31197CE00805F650D767B22D0@wilber.adroit.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 02:14:27PM -0400, Robinow, David wrote:
>> From: raphael [mailto:raphael@oninet.pt]
>> Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g.,
>> alt.os.cygwin)
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:35AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> > Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so
>> > without proof is not useful.
>>
>> Glad you ask. Examine thread "Crontab problems"
>> MID <20020911204824.7327.qmail@web21008.mail.yahoo.com>
>> it shows my point.
>>
>If that's your point it's a pretty weak one. You got two answers to
>your question. One discussed the issue at length in a way you found
>useful. The other was a correct answer, although unnecessarily
>succinct. Nicholas is known to have a strange "vi" fetish but it's
>really quite harmless. It takes two to tango and if you hadn't gone
>out of YOUR way to provoke a fight the subsequent flame-fest could have
>been avoided.
>
>Anyway, please go ahead and start your list. I'm getting tired of
>reading about it.
Good advice. Thanks, David. I'll stop arguing now, too.
I thought there were some correctable misconceptions here but I think
I over-optimistically added one too many adjectives to my thinking.
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/