On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:50:15 +0100, Johannes Sixt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 29 January 2008 16:19, Herman Robak wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:58:49 +0100, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For my two cents, the reasons Cinelerra doesn't seem to be worth my
time
> and effort are:
>
> - It crashes.
> - It won't build.
> - It can't handle DV.
> - It's not open source.
I can only say "amen"!
Herman, Matthew does not differentiate between "open source" and "open
development".
Well, he kinda did. He explained why the merely available source
isn't really "open source" in the ways we think matters.
He also seems to think that everyone has the right to fork
Cinelerra and still call the fork "Cinelerra" without the original
author's consent, which is at least morally an obnoxious attitude.
No he didn't. On the contrary, in his previous post he expressed
resentment about the apparent lack of will to choose a completely
different name.
--
Herman Robak
_______________________________________________
Cinelerra mailing list
[email protected]
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
