challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

[Jo Rhett]

On Jun 7, 2008, at 3:05 PM, Garance A Drosehn wrote:
> The fact that we reject your request that we provide further support
> for 6.2 does not mean we did not understand the question.  It is you
> who are not understanding the reply.

At the very least, I phrased my question badly.  Because I asked "why"  
and I heard "no".  And "no" is not an answer to "why".  I still  
haven't heard the why.

> What you are asking for is *SUPPORT* for 6.2.  That implies that we

No, I never asked for that.  Depending on the answer to "why" I was  
going to decide what my choices were for helping out and improving the  
situation in some form.  Without the "why" I haven't the foggiest idea  
how to help.  (for already well known bugs which don't need my time/ 
effort/attention)

-- 
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source  
and other randomness