On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Fbsd8 <fb...@a1poweruser.com> wrote:
Boy this simple critique request sure has gotten out of hand. So lets
set the record straight.
You got exactly what you asked for.
On the subject ezjail not being referenced in the document like it is in
the current version of the online handbook is just a writing content
error.
With all the spam you've put on the forums and mailing list(s) about
qjail, I wonder how true it is that you just "whoops, forgot to mention
ezjail" in your propaganda rewrite.
When it comes to the question of the handbook jail chapter needing
updating, A member of the document team has already offered to partner up
with me to get it added to the handbook as fast as possible.
The documentation team will never accept such poorly-written stuff that's
laced with "use qjail use qjail use qjail - it's the only way!" I'll
believe it when I see it.
On the subject of qjail being a fork of ezjail, of course it is.
Forks don't completely overwrite the copyright of a project and claim it
as their own, while just changing variable names and renaming the tool
something else. This is not a fork, it's a complete rip-off that gives no
credit to the original author (who did MUCH more of the work).
Qjail was developed by the qjail project team
No it wasn't. It was developed by the ezjail author, and you just made
small changes and called it your own.
Our British member concluded that the author of ezjail must be British
based solely on the spelling of the flavour directory. He also convinced
us that his Beerware license was British humor, a joke, and should not be
taken serous.
I think the GPL is a joke, but people still take it seriously. You can't
just decide a license should be completely ignored.
I was chosen the project leader and public voice only because my English
was the best among us.
It gives me a headache trying to read some of the stuff you write. You've
got an American guy and a British guy and neither of their native English
is better than yours?
