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

Re: this post is not off-topic

>>"David" == David Wright <ichbin@shadlen.org> writes:

 >> Our users. Not our users of the most popular
 >> architectures. _all_ our users.

 David> Please! Your last justification "we do it because it floats
 David> our boat, not for the users" was at least honest.

	I see that you can't maintain a civil dialogue. I certainly do
 not understand how you come to the conclusion that this statement of
 mine is dishonest; but I most certainly am close to disregarding you
 as a rude, inconsiderate, troll.

 David> One of your $250 hours would do more for "_all_ our users" if
 David> spent on a i386 than on 68k.

	And this statement either displays a profound lack f
 understanding of English (quite possible, it is not your first
 language), or a worse grasp of simple logic. All our users do not use
 i386, hence the statement above does not make sense. Secondly, I
 doubt if the statement is really valid either, see below for my

	Indeed, were you a prime example of a user of i386 box, I
 would now be tempted to lower the importance of i386 in Debian
 (despite the fdact that I do not have a non i386 machine). 

 David> This simple, irrefutable fact

	It is not a fact, nor is this irrefutable. Uncovering and
 fixing porting related bugs leads to fixing problems that are
 generally flaws that have been hidden on other architectures, it
 leads to better design, often more modular, streamlined, and simpler,
 due to the resulting abstractions; portable software often is easier
 to maintain.

 David> does not make 68k users "second class citizens". If you want
 David> to argue this, you need to go back to the original metaphor
 David> and explain why obscure diseases deserve as much funding as
 David> those affecting large fractions of the population.

	Who the hell cares about sheer numbers of users out there in
 the wild? I sure as hell don't. If numbers had been important to me,
 I would not have been wasting my time on Linux. 

 >> Do you know what motivates the developers?

 David> I would certainly think so, since I am one professionally. And

	Professionally, remuneration often is the driver; it is not a
 factor in volunteer work on free software. A quick google search for
 you email address failed to turn up any hits apart from postings of a
 few user lists; so I have no idea if you work on any free software,
 and thus have a first hand understanding on what may drive people to
 work on it.

 David> I (and I strongly suspect most other developers) get a much
 David> bigger kick out of doing something new that out of doing
 David> something old on an obscure platform.

	Glad to know you feel that way, in case you ever show up in
 the NM queue. BTW, anyone who does not care about a solid, well
 tested, portable software is not very professional, really. Software
 engineering is more than just the latest 31337 cool hack; profession
 systems integration work requires solid, workanlike, professional QA
 work as well. I would hope that most Debian developers are not
 juvenile 31337 kiddies with a minuscule attention span.

 >> Debian leadership? The project leader has no say in deciding
 >> what architectures one releases.

 David> "No say?" That is flat-out wrong. The PL and RM may not decide
 David> alone, but they most certainly have a say, and a large one, in

	And on what, pray, are you basing this? When did the DPL ever
 have _any_ sayu whatsoever in the arches one releases for? The RM
 needs to bve convinced, yes, but he merely has veto pwoers, he
 certainlky does not add new arches all by his lone self, over the
 objections of people doing the real work. 

 David> Certainly the appropriate conclusion wouldn't be to "ban" any
 David> 68k package someone wants to produce. But it would be to say
 David> we will not freeze the whole damn distribution while we wait
 David> for them and the infrastructure they require.

	I am so glad you are not the RM. 


 "You can't expect a mother to be with a small child all the time,"
 Margaret Mead once remarked, with her usual good sense, but in 1978
 she shocked feminists by snapping that women don't really have
 children to put them in day care twelve hours a day, either. Caroline
 Bird, "The Two Paycheck Marriage"
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: