Gianluca Turconi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:dnjv0v$gc9$2 @sea.gmane.org:
> Of course, if you want to show to the readers the truth of an axiom > like: "Open Source as a way of producing software has limitations" you > can *show* examples, but you don't *demonstrate* anything. > > I think we have a cultural problem here. I really cannot understand the distinction your making between "showing" that openoffice is full of bugs and "demonstrating" it. When I point out that there are ~700 bugs marked fixed in 2.01, but present in 2.0, I think I am "demonstrating" that the process by which OOo is released has limitations. You may say I am merely showing it. The distinction does nothing to reduce the bug count. You might say that this is untypical for open source software as a whole -- but that would be really ridiculous. Everyone knows that OOo is one of the most successful and relatively bug-free bits of open source software in the world, and that the huge majority of sourceforge projects don't bloody work at all. -- Andrew Brown The email in the header does not work. Contact details and possibly useful macros from http://www.darwinwars.com/lunatic/bugs/oo_macros.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
