On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 04:10 -0500, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 18:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 09:11 -0400, Dimi Paun wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 07:42 -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Evolution belongs in the bitbucket.
> > Alan,
> > This is pretty scary. Switching people off email clients like
> > this is a big problem. People get really attached to their MUAs
> > for lots of reasons, not in the least being that their mail
> > archives can't be easily moved from client to client.
> > Guys, Red Hat has been pushing Evo for a _long_ time now. It has
> > to stay behind their choices, not force millions of users to switch
> > at a drop of a hat (pun intended :)).
> > This is a lot more serious than switching web browsers or other
> > apps. Too many people will get affected, and rightfully pissed
> > at RH. Silly excuses that you couldn't hire people to work on it
> > will not fly.
> > I'm really surprised that folks at RH throw around such scenarios
> > without thinking a bit about consequences. How can enterprises trust
> > you with any technological guidance/decision when you are willing to
> > do things that would cost them untold millions without even blinking?
> You are over over-dramatizing. This is not a place for enterprises to
> get technology guidance and nobody's personal opinions here is going to
> cost anyone untold millions.
He's not over-dramatizing anything, he's telling the truth. Evo
occupies a slot now, and it's stupid to throw it in the bitbucket.
Forget any other posts that I send in this thread, there was a date
screwup on my system. Sorry about the confusion.