Agressive FUD by Fedora contributor

[Axel Thimm]

On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 10:20:11PM -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> On 10/15/06, seth vidal <skvidal at linux.duke.edu> wrote:
> >On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 22:00 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> >Axel is not trying to break people's systems and there was too much
> >invective in your post.
> 
> I did not mean to imply he is *trying* to break people's systems.  I
> am only stating what I know through experience, and this is that
> people who have used ATrpms (including myself) have had problems with
> yum.  It is pretty much the standard answer in #fedora to tell someone
> to remove ATrpms when diagnosing a problem, and it is a shame that
> this is the case.

Yes, it's a shame, so why are you doing it? If there were issues try
to nail them down and report them instead of continuously fudding
people.

> So let me rephrase my statement and say that using ATrpms has the
> "potential" to break your system.

A sudden change of facts. ...

> However, call me a cynic, I doubt this is going to happen.  Axel, I'd
> love for you to prove me wrong on this point.

I've proven you wrong in quite a few points already I guess.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20061016/d01940a7/attachment.sig>