| 1 |
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Frank Peters <frank.peters@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:48:46 -0500 |
| 3 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> I just said that this thread has *seriously* lacked on technical |
| 7 |
>> arguments. I haven't made almost any technical argument, because |
| 8 |
>> basically all the discussion has been around conspiracy theories |
| 9 |
>> ... |
| 10 |
>> *You* call *that* "a reasonable discussion of technical issues"? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Any *good* programmer realizes that programming is not at all |
| 14 |
> about writing code. The foremost tasks of a good programmer |
| 15 |
> are problem analysis, planning, and understanding both the overall |
| 16 |
> scheme and ramifications of any proposed solution. Once these |
| 17 |
> tasks are accomplished the actual coding, which is a relatively |
| 18 |
> trivial matter, can begin. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd.html |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
You may not agree with the points presented there, but there was |
| 23 |
*ample* "analysis, planning, and understanding of the overall scheme |
| 24 |
and ramifications" of the "proposed solution" (systemd in this case) |
| 25 |
before a single line of core was written. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
And then they also wrote the code. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> Therefore it is not unreasonable or unproductive to approach |
| 30 |
> the systemd issue from a political or philosophical perspective. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I will just answer: code talks. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> But having said that, I will admit that this thread has served |
| 35 |
> its purpose for me. My concerns about systemd have been addressed |
| 36 |
> and my fears have been calmed by the responses. I want to thank |
| 37 |
> all those who participated. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
You are welcome. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> However, I do remain cautiously optimistic. Anyone who understands |
| 42 |
> the human world knows all too well that idealistic causes do not |
| 43 |
> persist for long. I am sometimes surprised at the longevity of |
| 44 |
> Linux as a free and open project, but I realize that in time it too shall |
| 45 |
> succumb to the social forces that have destroyed similar endeavors. |
| 46 |
> I can only hope that the time will be long in coming. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Again, code talks. And Linux is not idealistic at all; I believe Linus |
| 49 |
and his lieutenants would laugh at the notion that it is. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Linux is a technological triumph, created, maintained and evolved by |
| 52 |
highly technically qualified people. Idealism had nothing to do with |
| 53 |
it; contrary to GNU/Hurd, the GPL-2 license was chosen because it was |
| 54 |
the best choice for technical reasons (highly collaborative project |
| 55 |
over the Internet). And because idealism has nothing to do with it, it |
| 56 |
didn't switched over to GPL-3. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Regards. |
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 61 |
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias |
| 62 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives