On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 04:16:03PM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12-08-05 23:29]: > > i have been alive for several decades and have other experiences that > > make me question the title "professional" in things and when describing > > people. and not all experiences with the title have been bad either. > > it really simply seems to be independent of the word, whether the > > software or the person is such. > > "Professional" merely distinguished the distro with two exellent paper > manuals and a dvd or two containing the distro and source code. There > was a lesser matching distro with no dvd's and only one manual, called > an upgrade, iirc. > well, while we await for the recap of the problem you asked for from the SuSe users who cannot build gimp-perl, i find this thread to be interesting and cannot help but continueing with it.
i think the word "Professional" is being used the right way here. I have no problems with that. "Enabled Professional" though, might be not applicable since those documents failed and they are here asking for help from undefined volunteers. i like build problems though, it is extremely interesting. you asked for a recap of build problems. i do not actually have any problems building things myself -- not really. i am very picky and have been pounding this one very fine point about the way my distribution, my build tools and my pet project work together. i build with gnu build tools on linux. i am using my own build of the kernel and my distribution is debian sid (where there are few promises and i know that). my pet project is everything from glib through gimp. because of the problem i had with this one fine point, i had to start building my window manager as well. here is the one problem: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=322885 and the fact that three different developers from three different development communities are there looking at it speaks very well of all of the software i am using. i am not a "Professional" and loathe to give myself this name. in fact, recently i have received personal email in which people asked me to define what it is that i do for gimp. my problems with defining my role have to do with the fact that as soon as i do this, i can probably be replaced by someone with "qualifications". also, the way i ran around pestering the people in debian and libtool and glib/pango/gtk+ was anything but professional. btw, being able to build gimp-perl has nothing to do with this bug report. i was able to use debian software and build gimp and gimp-perl for a very very long while now. one might call it "professionally enabled" that way. however, as i said, it is not like all three of these development communities do not have issues and problems you can easily show. i am so impressed with the bug report and the participants. i am curious however if it really is a problem or if one or all of them there know what needs to be done to fix it. it really made for some great mail though. i got this url from the gnu guy: http://aquamarine.bikeshed.com/ he was consoling me when i was being hurt because the gtk+ developers were complaining about the way my patch also made the file more readible. without actually being a part of the debian community, i wonder how many of their problems are like this. Maybe Novell could consider rehiring some of their linux staff and coming up with a distribution entitled "Professionally Enabled". i dunno, it has a certain flair and appeal to it, you think? carol _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user