Re: Bug#915541: Removal of upstream "--will-cite" functionality has been reverted
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 11:06 AM Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> wrote:
:
> (1) the wording almost requires citation
I take this as you agree that it does not require citation. Also you
do not point to how the default behaviour of the current version of
GNU Parallel conflicts with Debian's standards. If you believe it
conflicts with Debian's standards, please point to the specific
paragraph(s).
> (2) it does so by providing a version-specific citation, not a generic
To me it is more honest to cite the specific version you are actually
using than to cite an article about software that is 10 years old, and
which may not have the features that you depend on. But if the general
consensus is that it is more honest to cite the old article, I will be
perfectly happy with that. If this is what blocks us from reaching a
compromise we can agree on, I will change that in the next version.
> With a wrong eye, one could even see it as extortion/blackmail.
To me extortion/blackmail is when I have done something that I cannot
undo and now I have to pay to keep it a secret.
If you feel it can be seen as extortion/blackmail: Would it not make
it even *more* important that the researchers read the citation notice
*before* using the software?
To me it could never be perceived as neither extortion nor blackmail:
* The user is aware of the citation notice when he starts using GNU Parallel
* There are plenty of alternatives - more than 50 of them are even
mentioned in the documentation
* If you feel GNU Parallel does not contribute enough to warrant a
citation: Prove it by using an alternative
Would it be fair to summarize your critique as you in your personal
opinion do not like the citation notice, but there are neither legal
nor technical reasons for this? In other words: It is a matter of
taste.
/Ole
Reply to: