Thank you! - jek3
Edward Pilatowicz wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 08:50:50AM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > >> Nicolas Williams wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:14:55AM -0400, James Carlson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I think the ARC would be derelict in its duty if it simply said "FOSS >>>> means no expectation of source change." That may be true of some >>>> projects, but certainly not of others, and the ARC should not be >>>> presuming one magic answer for all cases. >>>> >>>> >>> Hmmm. Let me try again. >>> >>> For standalone utilities like Unison I don't agree. The ARC can >>> reasonably ask lots of things (like that it be Secure By Default), but >>> there's a fine line between asking for reasonable changes and killing >>> the project. >>> >>> I think for libraries the ARC can and should be a lot more inquisitive, >>> and potentially require many more changes. >>> >>> For core OS features the ARC should treat FOSS as any other Sun project. >>> >>> >> How does the consumer (in this case the user) know whether unison is a >> "core OS feature", or some integration of perhaps lesser-quality or >> otherwise inferior FOSS? >> >> > > sigh. i'm really tired of this silly debate. > this is simply my $0.02 and i probably won't reply to any replies to it. > > i'm actually more interested in the actual case at hand vs the general > good vs bad software issue (which i think barts previous comments addressed > wonderfully). > > you categorization of unison as "inferior FOSS" is totally subjective > and inappropriate. unison is a wonderful tool that does exactly what > it was designed todo. i'm a huge fan of high-quality software (go read > my bug reports if you don't believe me) and i've been using unison on > a daily basis for many years now. > > if you think that unison is "inferior" because it doesn't support > all the features -you- want (like hard links) then it's FOSS, feel free > to go change it. > > of course i've done lots of system administrator too, and guess what? > when i needed to migrate data around that may have contained hard links > then i didn't use unison. thankfully there are plenty of other tools > available that. see: rsync, ufsdump/ufsrestore, etc. > > so please, stop judging the "quality" of some piece of software based > on your personal feature set preferences. > > ed > >
