> On 23 May 2017, at 20:21, ToddAndMargo <toddandma...@zoho.com> wrote: > On 05/23/2017 10:47 AM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: >>> On 23 May 2017, at 19:23, ToddAndMargo <toddandma...@zoho.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/23/2017 06:30 AM, Will Coleda wrote: >>>> Removed? It's still available athttps://github.com/tadzik/panda … >>> >>> It is on its way out. The developers over on the chat >>> line directed me to zef when I asked for help getting >>> panda working. >>> >>>>> Panda stinks. >>>> That's not really true or called for. >>> >>> Panda is broken and not going to be repaired. The >>> developers on the chat line recommend zef instead. >>> Was polite enough? >> Perhaps you should check out the section “The End of an Era” in last weeks >> Perl 6 Weekly: >> https://p6weekly.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/2017-20-crossing-the-alps/ >> You should realize that open source software is not made by robots but by >> people. People for which keeping up with changes can take more resources >> than they have at hand. >> Also remember that without panda, I don’t think we would have had an >> ecosystem out now as fleshed out as it is now. >> So saying that certain software stinks, feels more like projection than >> anything else. So yes, *I* think it was uncalled for. >> Liz > > Would substituting "broken" for "stinks" be polite enough?
IMO yes, because that would be factual. Liz
