Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > A.B., Khalid wrote: > > Ilias Lazaridis wrote: > > > >>The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. > > > > You are mistaken. The first steps are the following: > [...] - (nonrelevant comments) > > > 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it > > does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe-- is an > > altogether different issue. The fact of the matter remains that a > > project _does_ exist, one which people (including myself) do in fact > > use; and because it does exist there is no reason to "make" it. > [...] > > I've already understood your viewpoint.
You just say that you do. Your repeating the same arguments using the same logic testifies that you don't. > > My requirements about an open-source project (or sub-project) are very > simple: Your "requirements" are just what they are, _your_ requirements. And since they are so, maybe you'd like to address them yourself instead of continuing to complain how "your requirements" (simple or otherwise) are not being met and that hence the author of this project is this, and/or the entire language is that. Enough said here. > You have the right to refuse this. > > I (and any other reader) have the right to derive our conclusions about > you and the reasons that you refuse a _real_ collaborative work. Of course I have the right to do what I like (and as regards pyMinGW this was explained earlier in this thread); your mere pronunciation that I have that right neither subtracts nor adds to it one iota. And it seems to me that the community has indeed reached some conclusions which any reasonable person with a fair grasp of English can quickly identify from the nature of their responses to you, here and elsewhere. > > You already found the mingw-patch for building python. It is > > added/managed/maintained by community members. > > This is a one-man-show, which does not invite to open collaboration > (feedback is requested to closed email): > > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/98fa42dabff68db2 > > python [foundation, crew, dictator, ...] should engourage open > collaboration, should engourage _collaboration_. Oh well, I hope it would not come as a shock to you that pyMinGW does allow collaboration. Here is a quote from the pyMinGW-24 changes document: --------------------- pyMinGW-24-0064: Dec 11th, 2004 --------------------- [1] Included \PC\pyconfig.h in the Python24.iss. Thanks to Matthias Gondan for the report and the fix. Quoted from http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW-24.html So you see, the collaborative effort is there. It is just not responding to "your requirements" to your liking that is bothering you! Now if you want to continue complaining about how "your requirements" are not being met, by volunteers who make their work available for free in their spare time, to your liking, go ahead. Knock yourself out. Khalid -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
