low profile or not?

[-cEnsE- <cense@mail.ru>]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 04:02:40 +0400
> To: independence-l@independence.seul.org
> From: Roger Dingledine <arma@mit.edu>
> Reply-To: independence-l@independence.seul.org
> Subject: Re: (FWD) Re: Resurrecting Indy - Food for thought
> 
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:39:36AM +0200, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
> > Indy must be able to work stand alone since it is very difficult to get
people
> > for
> > something who has a too low profile like a set of nehanced packages on an
FTP
> > site.
> 
> Is this true? Specifically, is it true that a set of packages on an ftp
> site (including uploading them elsewhere) is necessarily low profile?
> 
> --Roger
> 


Depends on who you are talking to, if you ask some UNIX geek from Berkley, no
packages on FTP are not low profile at all but if you ask your newly converted
windoze person, i would think that packages on some FTP somewhere would be
very low-profile to them. Now we ask ourselves... would possible Indy users
consider packages on FTP low profile? i think so.

-- 
cEnsE,

  Project Nothing
    http://projectnothing.netfirms.com/
    
  KLP (KingLocust Productions)
    http://projectnothing.netfirms.com/klp/