9base in Fedora?

[seth vidal]

On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 19:14 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 01:42:02PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 18:41 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:56:25PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 17:52 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > > What would cause someone to choose to use these tools rather than the 
> > > > > ones that exist in Fedora already?
> > > > 
> > > > They come from an environment where plan9 is more commonly used and want
> > > > to preserve the behaviors they know/like?
> > > 
> > > Putting them in your path's just going to break things.
> > > 
> > 
> > 'just going to break things' is the criteria, now?
> 
> If they're used to plan9, they'll presumably want these in their path. 
> If they're in their path, other utilities are going to misbehave in ways 
> that will be difficult to debug. Why would someone choose to have a 
> broken system?

Oh cmon, Matthew, you can't be serious.

just s/broken/development/ in your above statement and it is obvious.

people want broken things b/c then they can fix them.

-sv