David E. Thiel wrote:
> Or simply use any of the freely available, cleanly licensed and more
> functional alternatives, many of which are written by programmers
> posessing an at least marginal semblance of sanity:
Sorry David, but I'm going to pick on this reply as an example of a more
general case.
It ought to be possible for us to discuss these issues without resorting
to ad hominem attacks. Even if we may personally find someone's
perspective unreasonable, the question for public discussion is _only_
whether the software author's license/perspective/demands are compatible
with the FreeBSD ports system. If the answer is "no," then no harm, no
foul, everyone moves on with their lives. Regardless of the outcome
however it is a hard and fast requirement that we conduct ourselves as
professionals, especially if we feel compelled to criticize another
party for not doing so.
I've written three original pieces of software for FreeBSD now, and even
though I have complete control over the software itself, and the ports
for the 2 in the ports tree, I still get a non-trivial number of what I
will politely refer to as "wacky user questions." Therefore I have a
certain amount of sympathy with Tuomo's position here. I think it's
unfortunate that we could not reach an accommodation for this particular
case, but I wish Tuomo the best of luck in his future endeavors.
Doug
PS, I do not in any way wish to discourage users from sending me
questions about my stuff, although I find that not-infrequently my reply
is, "You might want to give the man page another look ..." :)
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
