They have. Which questions do you think aren't answered?
gl:
"Bjorn, what about the point that Rockbox is most likely 'real software,
written by real people with many fake names'? If you cannot enforce the
accuracy of a given name, then why try?"
tim:
"The patch
came from an email address... that's enough (under all but the most
extreme cases) to hold someone legally accountable. So why resist
identification by email (which you have to use anyway to send in
patches), and alternatively, why require anything more than email when
it does the job better than anything short of picture IDs verified in
person?"
Paul:
" Linus, Daniel and Bjorn should sit down and hammer out exactly what their
whole policies on names Given, Chosen, and Pseudo are, their list of reasons
for it, and publish that to this mailing list. They've certainly had the
chance to see the arguments given here, but I at least don't feel like I've
got a clear perspective on what the causes for the policy exactly are."
You decided your conclusions before starting this discussion. You even
made that poll, it didn't give the result you expected, and now you find
new arguments why it shows this result.
No, you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. It's obvious that some people
who would like to contribute choose not to sign up - BlueChip and I don't
for starters, but you only know about us because we complained. Many people
would just turn away.
--
gl
