I see your point, but refusing www. does nothing but make pyjamas less accessible to people. It is also not fixable with a bug patch.
How about from now on all communication/documentation regarding pyjamas must be written in Esperanto because it is a language liberated from the ties to any particular potentially evil country? On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Sebastian Hilbert <[email protected]> wrote: > On Friday, February 03, 2012 09:49:57 AM Peter Bittner wrote: > >> 2012/2/2 Jeff Kunce <[email protected]>: > >> > to change anything against your principles will go nowhere. Or, in your > >> > words, "it's not up for discussion: please just accept it." > >> > Just a statement of reality, not a call for change or discussion. > >> > >> I actually do like this benevolent dictatorship. Btw, there are > >> several other, mostly successful projects, that share Pyjamas' fate; > >> examples include the Linux kernel, and Python. > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_for_Life > >> > >> Just to make it clear that not everyone dislikes Luke's stubborn > >> sticking to (his) principles. We've seen enough FOSS projects failing, > >> because there was no strong leadership. I take this as a strong point > >> of the Pyjamas project. > > > > Looking closely there is not even a dictatorship. Commit rights have been > given out more easily then in most projects. > > > > It is more a do-ocracy. > > > > One common misperception in FOSS seems to be that anyone coder needs formal > authorization to work on code or improve the website while all there is to > it is sending patches upstream. > > > > More often then not lengthy discussions lead to anything but code. If one > does not like the perceived leadership then just take over by being more > active, improving weak spots etc. > > > > Regards, > > Sebastian Hilbert -- ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
