On May 12, 2008, at 10:48 AM, Gus Wirth wrote:
I don't understand how the developer is somehow obligated to solve this problem. Every time you (generically) say "they should just do ..." means you are putting a burden on them. Who the hell are you to create additional work for someone else without being their employer or relative? Some developers will gladly fix things when pointed out, but if they don't you still have no right to complain. It's not your software and you're not paying anything to get it fixed. Go use something else.
I can't speak for Andrew or anyone else, but yes, if I have the option, I usually will use something else. I don't see, however, why it's an undue burden to expect that someone who's going to design their project's build process to use autoconf/automake to take the time to learn how to use those tools correctly to generate SANE dependency checking.
If they're not going to learn how to properly use autotools, then they shouldn't use it for their build process.
Who the hell am I? I'm a guy who likely would contribute to some projects if they weren't headed up by jerks telling me I must be too stupid to figure out how to make their code work. I'm the guy who's written a fair number of in-house tools to replace open/free projects where my patches have been rejected "because we're throwing it all away and redesigning for the next release anyway." I'm a guy who's reached the point of "if it won't compile and I can't coax it to build clean in an hour, I throw it away and look elsewhere," because I have my own damned job to do.
The freetards in the 'verse will claim this means I'm not deserving of free software. I counter that this, in turn, means they're not deserving of my time.
Gregory -- Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: EAF4844B keyserver: pgpkeys.mit.edu -- KPLUG-List@kernel-panic.org http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
