On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 05:48:25PM +0200, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote: > Russ Allbery wrote: > >That doesn't mean your objections are wrong, and I certainly haven't > >looked at it in detail. But they don't seem to be widely shared. > It is software, a branch of mathematics, what is being discussed here. In > mathematics a proof outweights the opinion of the whole humankind. It > doesn't matter how much consensus you gather, pi won't become 3. My > objections to xz are based on proof that xz is wrong. No. Computer science is mathematics. Algorithms are mathematics. Software is something else. You cannot "prove" that a customer's priorities are wrong. > >I realize that you're quite confident in your expertise here, and quite > >possibly have reason to be confident, but it might be worth remembering > >that, to the rest of us, you're just some random person on a mailing list > >who has written some competing software and wants us to use it. No > >offense, but we see a *lot* of people like that, and most of them are > >significantly overstating their claims. So you're facing a fair bit of > >natural skepticism. > You continue speaking as if this were a political question that you can win > by obtaining the approval of the majority or something. There is no place > here neither for faith nor for scepticism. Just verify that my affirmations > are true, or refute them. > I am not writing here because I want you to use lzip. I am writing here > because I want you (Debian) to stop spreading FUD against lzip, like ".lz > only supports CRC32" (implying that lzip integrity is weak), or gratuitously > affirming that ".xz is superior to .lz". I am still waiting for anybody in > this list to tell us in what aspect is .xz superior to .lz. Please point us to where Debian is making these statements. You are not going to get all Debian developers to stop disapproving of lzip by having a protracted argument on debian-devel with some /other/ group of Debian developers. If a particular Debian developer is making such statements, you should probably take this up with them. That aside, in this thread you certainly have done much more in this thread than ask Debian to stop making unsubstantiated claims; you are insisting that Debian should accept your position that lzip is superior, and you have asserted that Debian should drop xz and adopt lzip. Denying that you have done this does nothing to help you appear more reasonable. > >Therefore, our community welcomes both, and does not > >react well to aggressive statements like this about how the other set of > >beliefs is obviously wrong. > Aggressive statement? I guess your community should change its own > documentation. I merely copied the description from there: > http://www.debian.org/intro/free > "Truly free software is always free. Software that is placed in the public > domain can be snapped up and put into non-free programs. Any improvements > then made are lost to society. To stay free, software must be copyrighted > and licensed." Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This is not an official position of the Debian project; I've reported this as a bug: http://bugs.debian.org/794116 -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature