1 |
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Yuri K. Shatroff <yks-uno@××××××.ru> wrote: |
2 |
> Thanks, it really doesn't look like forcing. |
3 |
> On the higher level, there must be some politics going on; that's also not |
4 |
> forcing, but politics. On the lower level (that of users) one's always got |
5 |
> the worst case to demonstrate there's no forcing. But why not go "the best |
6 |
> case"? It's a big mistake to think that developing software is about writing |
7 |
> code; NO! it's about communication. |
8 |
|
9 |
The arrogance of some posters in this thread is that they think |
10 |
"because I've never heard of it, it didn't happen". Newsflash, you're |
11 |
not omniscient. |
12 |
|
13 |
FACT of the matter is: pulseaudio's purpose was well-communicated by |
14 |
the original designer. Its adoption by major distributions was openly |
15 |
announced and widely discussed by the people of the relevant teams. |
16 |
/run was communicated to and independently agreed on by the teams of |
17 |
all major distros. /usr's merge and the rationale behind it was |
18 |
publicly announced. systemd's design documents and documentation are |
19 |
all out in the open... |
20 |
|
21 |
Just because you don't like it and avoid "his" blog like plague, |
22 |
doesn't mean they aren't talking. |
23 |
|
24 |
Or by communication, do you mean something else? Like "get users to |
25 |
vote on every color and doodad of the system"? Because that's not how |
26 |
open source works. Remember Linus' informal title? Benevolent |
27 |
_Dictator_. Open source does not mean democracy. It simply and exactly |
28 |
means that you can choose to be free from their control if you wanted. |
29 |
|
30 |
What more should they do? Go to your house and offer to fix your PC |
31 |
for you? That's just entitlement. |
32 |
-- |
33 |
This email is: [ ] actionable [ ] fyi [x] social |
34 |
Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [x] no |
35 |
Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate [ ] soon [x] none |