[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: cdrtools cdrecord/cdrecord.c

On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:00:59AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> wrote:
>> > I am not against Linux, I am however against stupidity and evilness.
>> But your comments regarding Linux kernel developers would appear to 
>> indicate that you are against Linux.  Personal opinion, nothing more.
>This is not true!
>I am not against Linux, however I don't like the way the Linux kernel developers
>personally attack people who tell them where they make mistakes.
>Let me make an example: if you take Linus Torvalds statements on Linux kernel
>include files for serious, then it is _forbidden_ to test kernel interfaces.
>Also it is a matter of facts that the Linux kernel people constantly insert new
>snares against CD/DVD recording.

Joerg, just because interfaces change from time to time in the Linux
kernel, they are _not_ changing them deliberately just to spite
you. Really.

>Once the Linux kernel folks start cooperating

You don't seem to have finished your sentence here.


>> in what one perceives to be a bug are a different issue.  For example, I 
>> can see why Debian folks would add contact information to cdrecord if 
>> they have made modifications to it.  I can also see why Debian would 
>> remove references to cdrecord-Prodvd, although I don't necessarily agree 
>> with those objections.  Neither is truly a bug, but a preference.
>-	Linux kernel folks modify interfaces without notifying the users
>	even though there are less than 5 Authors who write software that
>	uses the related interfaces.

Joerg, please - I believe you're wrong here. If it's your opinion that
less than 5 authors use the Linux sg interface (the one I'm assuming
you're describing here), then in my experience you're simply
wrong. I've _personally_ been involved in several different projects
that use the sg interface, none of which you would know about. I would
expect there to be many more out there...

>-	Most Debian patches _cause_ problems instead of fixing them.

Again, I disagree. There are bugs in our BTS to back me up. Please can
you point to some patches that _actually_ cause problems?

>-	Debian people do not cooperate by not talking to the Authors of the 
>	software.

In general, or just cdrtools? Generally, we have useful, productive
relationships with upstream developers. In many cases, Debian patches
are gratefully accepted and integrated into new upstream releases. In
some cases, some of the patches we apply are clearly not useful to
upstream developers (e.g. changing install locations, etc. to
integrate more closely with the rest of the system). Sometimes we even
end up taking over upstream packages if the original developer has
given up.

To return to previous discussion, but hopefully more calmly this time:

Joerg, you may think that you're simply speaking plainly and directly
in some of your mails. I know that German is already commonly a much
more direct language than English; maybe your choice of words is
affected by that. I _hope_ that your intent is not to insult the
people who are trying to work with you, but the tone of your emails
often makes it seem that way.

Sometimes people who are making changes to cdrtools simply don't agree
with some of the design decisions you've made. That doesn't
necessarily make them stupid or wrong. Some _might_ be (there are lots
of idiots in the world, after all! :-) ), but not all. Some more
flexibility and consideration of other people's suggestions might help
you get on much better with people...

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
We don't need no education.
We don't need no thought control.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: