2010/10/5 jaromil <[email protected]>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
> re all,
>
> On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 01:52:35PM +0200, Aymeric Mansoux wrote:
>
>> The position of the FSF, RMS and co are much needed to balance the
>> other side of the spectrum. No doubt. But it could be more
>> encouraging when transitional efforts (such as the Puredyne
>> community and its pragmatic position) are not put in the same
>> category as open source free riders, which will unfortunately always
>> happen in black/white vision of the world.
>>
>> Of course, the counter argument is that, the FSF would not be the
>> FSF if it did not have such a dichotomic position ;)
>
>
> *pragmatically speaking* i see that you are the only one having a
> dichotomic position

nice rhetorical move ;)

> since the dynebolic.org website had always a link
> to pure:dyne and that is a 2-hop from the GNU.org website's
> recommended GNU/Linux distributions.
>
> OTOH you have zero links to our dynebolic.org website.
>
> little details? but this is it.

Yeah this is a good point. I wasn't a developer in the days when pd
was db, but I've added a link and a sentence to the "about" page which
I hope puts it in the correct light. Dynebolic has been inspirational
for a long time, that's fo sho.

The sentence is added in the repos, though I think it takes a little
while for the public site to pull from it.
https://code.launchpad.net/~puredyne-team/puredyne-www/trunk

Dan


> if you like to keep talking about imaginary things, well i hope other
> people are at least entertained by it; if there was ever a transition,
> i know well who is responsible for breaking it.
>
>  ciao
>
> - --
> jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

---
[email protected]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne

Reply via email to