Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
What's the point of having these/. interviews, regardless of who they're with, if all we get are answers to lame, uninteresting questions?
This isn't the only case where this has happened, of course. The same thing happened with the Linus Torvalds interview a few weeks ago. The best questions remained ignored, or if answered indirectly, the answers were pretty half-
So the good questions were ignored. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
What's the point of having these /. interviews, regardless of who they're with, if all we get are answers to lame, uninteresting questions?
This isn't the only case where this has happened, of course. The same thing happened with the Linus Torvalds interview a few weeks ago. The best questions remained ignored, or if answered indirectly, the answers were pretty half-
Re:So the good questions were ignored. (Score:5, Funny)
Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
I doubt she has an opinion one way or another on systemd.
Re:So the good questions were ignored. (Score:5, Funny)
Just like many people predicted in the submission for asking the questions, it looks like the good, hard-hitting questions were totally ignored.
I doubt she has an opinion one way or another on systemd.
First of all, if you are "neutral" on the horrific abuse that is systemd you are part of the problem!!!