Alexander Volovics wrote:
On 06/20/2012 03:53 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
Since I am responsible for initiating the attacks on Fedora for using
Gnome 3, I feel I should clarify with some kind of apology. I did not
say nor do I mean that F17 is a defective version of Linux. Just that it
has a defect
Greg Woods wrote:
I tend to agree with ajax's opinion on the
"Linux is all about choice" meme:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
What ajax seems to be saying is that it is not realistic to include
every possible choice in a given distribution. I agree
Well then I stand corrected! I once again apologize, and will keep mt
"pop-ins" as minimal and brief as possible! Thank you for clearing this
up for me! LoL!
EGO II
On 06/24/2012 03:02 AM, Daniel wrote:
Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
While I don't consider myself on the level of most of the
Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
While I don't consider myself on the level of most of the people here,
I also am not stupid enough to think my "blanket statement" will be
wonderfully and miraculously accepted by all.
The issue wasn't whether a blanket statement would be accepted by all.
The iss
On 06/23/2012 11:17 PM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
Stunned silence..#headspinnig!
If the analogy made your head-spin, then you couldn't have followed
the actual discussion, which involved a significant later omitted by
the analogy (exactly that some participants were not trying to change
On 06/23/2012 11:30 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/23/2012 07:59 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
Someone claimed that they found gnome bashing tiresome. Your response
was they should complain to the Gnome developers.
No, that wasn't my response.
If one were going to kill a snake, then I would indeed _
On 06/23/2012 10:23 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 08:20:05AM -0400, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
Uhhguys? not to be a pain in the arse or anything, but does it
matter either way? I have a slew of e-mails of you guys going back
and forth, let's just leave it as "You have YO
On 06/23/2012 10:09 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/23/2012 06:51 AM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
Wow. Your resort to personally attacking me is rather astounding, as
also is your imputing arrogance to my making a point of pure logic.
On 06/23/2012 07:59 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
Someone claimed that they found gnome bashing tiresome. Your response
was they should complain to the Gnome developers.
No, that wasn't my response.
If one were going to kill a snake, then I would indeed _suggest_
smashing its head rather than
On 06/23/2012 10:09 AM, Daniel wrote:
Okay, now, go back and read the opinion that Mike Wohlgemuth actually
expressed, which began with the claim that I'm astonishingly arrogant.
I apologize if I misinterpreted your statement. Someone claimed that
they found gnome bashing tiresome. Your res
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 08:20:05AM -0400, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
> Uhhguys? not to be a pain in the arse or anything, but does it
> matter either way? I have a slew of e-mails of you guys going back
> and forth, let's just leave it as "You have YOUR opinion..and He
[..]
> in any case.
On 06/23/2012 06:51 AM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
Wow. Your resort to personally attacking me is rather astounding, as
also is your imputing arrogance to my making a point of pure logic.
Uhhguys? not to be a pain in the a
On 06/22/2012 11:47 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/22/2012 08:10 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
On 06/20/2012 11:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
Your fatigue would largely have been avoided had the Gnome
developers proceeded differently. So perhaps you should complain
to them. ;-)
Wow. The arrogance in that s
On 06/22/2012 04:55 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
The claim that Gnome developers tell people to kiss off is a
positive claim, one establishes it by pointing to an example of one
of them doing so.
Not really, you need to prove in happens in general. You talked about
GNOEM developers. That is not on
On Fri, 2012-06-22 at 14:34 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Back when I used Gnome, I occasionally posted questions on a Gnome
> forum. I was told there, several times, that the Gnome devs did not
> follow this forum (I got the impression that they didn't follow *any*
> forum, but I don't think that w
Not a reply to anyone in particular. But I have to disagree with OP. He did
not need to apologize. The feeling was like that he felt that something was
just not right. Now developers have their way of looking at things.
From what I see, I felt the same way when KDE moved from 3.5.X to 4.0.
On 06/22/2012 01:39 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
I want to you back up your claims, indeed. I'm involved with GNOME, you
claim something, but someone from GNOME asking for details is too
cumbersome?
Back when I used Gnome, I occasionally posted questions on a Gnome
forum. I was told there, several
On 06/22/2012 01:33 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
Now, it is cool that you try and change the subject. But please first
answer my first question please. Cannot have a discussion if you new
things are brought up without any response to my questions.
I wasn't intending to change the subject. I was onl
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:12:30AM -0700, Daniel wrote:
> On 06/22/2012 08:10 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 06:27:14AM -0700, Daniel wrote:
> >>>On 06/22/2012 05:00 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:45:06PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> >On 06/21/2012
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 10:14:46AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 06/22/2012 07:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >I think it is somewhat normal to ask for more details. And I understand
> >that proving a negative is difficult (XFCE/KDE), but that should still
> >be possible (sampling of all the answers).
On 06/22/2012 07:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
I think it is somewhat normal to ask for more details. And I understand
that proving a negative is difficult (XFCE/KDE), but that should still
be possible (sampling of all the answers).
It's well known that the Gnome devs avoid the user mailing lists
On 06/22/2012 08:10 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 06:27:14AM -0700, Daniel wrote:
On 06/22/2012 05:00 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:45:06PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 06/21/2012 09:36 PM, Roger wrote:
As I understand it to date the devs say:
"Go away",
On 06/22/2012 08:10 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
On 06/20/2012 11:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
Your fatigue would largely have been avoided had the Gnome
developers proceeded differently. So perhaps you should complain
to them. ;-)
Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
Wow. Y
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 04:34:34PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> So in short: you have a belief, no basis for it, but cannot be bothered
s/you have/someone has/
--
Regards,
Olav
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedor
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 06:27:14AM -0700, Daniel wrote:
> On 06/22/2012 05:00 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:45:06PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> >>>On 06/21/2012 09:36 PM, Roger wrote:
>
> >As I understand it to date the devs say:
> >"Go away", rightly so,
> >and "P
On 06/20/2012 11:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
Your fatigue would largely have been avoided had the Gnome developers
proceeded differently. So perhaps you should complain to them. ;-)
Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding. You
seriously believe that I should complain to the Gn
On 06/22/2012 05:00 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:45:06PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
>On 06/21/2012 09:36 PM, Roger wrote:
As I understand it to date the devs say:
"Go away", rightly so,
and "Put up or shut up", again rightly so.
I've never heard complaints about the KDE de
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:45:06PM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 06/21/2012 09:36 PM, Roger wrote:
> >As I understand it to date the devs say:
> >"Go away", rightly so,
> >and "Put up or shut up", again rightly so.
>
> I've never heard complaints about the KDE devs doing that, and I
> know that the
On 06/21/2012 09:36 PM, Roger wrote:
As I understand it to date the devs say:
"Go away", rightly so,
and "Put up or shut up", again rightly so.
I've never heard complaints about the KDE devs doing that, and I know
that the Xfce devs don't. AFAIK, only the Gnome devs say that.
--
users mailin
Then you should also apologize a second time for making unnecessary
disparaging remarks about Gnome-3.4.
Necessity and accuracy are largely orthogonal, and the fact that his
disparagement was unnecessary didn't render it inaccurate.
This Gnome bashing is becoming extremely tiresome.
Your f
On 06/20/2012 08:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/20/2012 07:28 AM, users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
Then you should also apologize a second time for making unnecessary
disparaging remarks about Gnome-3.4.
Necessity and accuracy are largely orthogonal, and the fact that his
disparageme
On 21/06/12 15:39, Mark Haney wrote:
On 06/21/2012 10:29 AM, Greg Woods wrote:
Well, I think it should be the choices that *I* think are better that
should be up first :-) Of course that's the problem, there is no
universally-agreed-on definition of "better".
--Greg
Sure there is, chocolat
On 06/21/2012 07:29 AM, Greg Woods wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 14:18 +0930, Tim wrote:
Obviously not, but the better choices should be up first, and by
default.
Well, I think it should be the choices that *I* think are better that
should be up first :-) Of course that's the problem, there i
On 06/21/2012 10:29 AM, Greg Woods wrote:
Well, I think it should be the choices that *I* think are better that
should be up first :-) Of course that's the problem, there is no
universally-agreed-on definition of "better".
--Greg
Sure there is, chocolate and peanut butter is better than e
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 14:18 +0930, Tim wrote:
> Obviously not, but the better choices should be up first, and by
> default.
Well, I think it should be the choices that *I* think are better that
should be up first :-) Of course that's the problem, there is no
universally-agreed-on definition of "
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 10:43 -0600, Greg Woods wrote:
> I don't think the problem is necessarily about saying that "Linux is
> about choice", but about expectations that this means every possible
> choice should be available in your favorite distro.
Obviously not, but the better choices should be u
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Daniel wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 07:28 AM, users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
>
>> Then you should also apologize a second time for making unnecessary
>> disparaging remarks about Gnome-3.4.
>
>
> Necessity and accuracy are largely orthogonal, and the fact t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/20/2012 05:43 PM, Greg Woods wrote:
> What ajax seems to be saying is that it is not realistic to
> include every possible choice in a given distribution. I agree.
> There are desktop environments available for Linux that are not
> shipped with F
> I tend to agree with ajax's opinion on the
> "Linux is all about choice" meme:
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
What ajax seems to be saying is that it is not realistic to include
every possible choice in a given distribution. I agree. There are
d
On 20 June 2012 14:53, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> I did not say nor do I mean that F17 is a defective version of Linux. Just
> that it
> has a defective Default Desktop Environment.
>
It takes all sorts I suppose.
I just switched back to Fedora after an absence of a few years,
specifically because
See? and THIS is what I meant before..about the Fedora Users being a
cut above the rest! I will say this much to Aaron and everyone else in
this group, from developers to users, to admins, to engineers, to coders
etc,.you are without a doubtthe classiest, most intelligent,
witty, kn
On 06/20/2012 07:28 AM, users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
Then you should also apologize a second time for making unnecessary
disparaging remarks about Gnome-3.4.
Necessity and accuracy are largely orthogonal, and the fact that his
disparagement was unnecessary didn't render it ina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/20/2012 03:09 PM, David wrote:
> On 6/20/2012 9:53 AM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
>> Since I am responsible for initiating the attacks on Fedora for
>> using Gnome 3, I feel I should clarify with some kind of apology.
>> I did not say nor do I mean tha
On 20/06/12 15:09, David wrote:
Linux is all about choice.
No, Linus was\is very pragmatic.
Hence kernel is still at gplv2
GNU is all about choice.
But in the world we live in,
more can be less.
--
Regards,
Frank
"Jack of all, fubars"
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On 06/20/2012 03:53 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
Since I am responsible for initiating the attacks on Fedora for using
Gnome 3, I feel I should clarify with some kind of apology. I did not
say nor do I mean that F17 is a defective version of Linux. Just that it
has a defective Default Desktop Environ
On 6/20/2012 9:53 AM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> Since I am responsible for initiating the attacks on Fedora for using
> Gnome 3, I feel I should clarify with some kind of apology. I did not
> say nor do I mean that F17 is a defective version of Linux. Just that it
> has a defective Default Desktop Env
Since I am responsible for initiating the attacks on Fedora for using
Gnome 3, I feel I should clarify with some kind of apology. I did not
say nor do I mean that F17 is a defective version of Linux. Just that it
has a defective Default Desktop Environment. F17 is fine version of
Linux. And once y
47 matches
Mail list logo
