Public SourceMage Discussion List

[George Sherwood <pilot AT beernabeer.com>]

On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 08:24 -0600, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
<snip of most of emrys text>

> > Having z-rejected being hosted and managed by a team member that
> > volunteers to help manage it is perfectly acceptable to me.  We have tons
> > of developers that explicitly don't support z-rejected.  Isn't it a bit
> > disingenuous to advertise that we do support it?
> 
> No, it's disingenuous (and fallacious) to claim we don't really support it
> just because some of our developers won't touch it.  We have people that
> don't have a problem supporting it, therefore it is supported both in name
> and in fact.

As a developer that has been around along time, I agree with emrys
position.  I am not looking for the holy grail of free software.  I am
working on this distribution to have a system that gets done what I want
and doesn't get in the way.  I don't see any gain to our distribution in
restricting it in this way.  IMO, users would flee when it got too
difficult to use the software they wanted.  Eventually it would drive
developers away.  I did not get into this for a quasi-religious quest.

George Sherwood

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part