From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M8KWd-0000IG-Dj for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5713EE053C; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316C8E053C for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C62096623D for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.377 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.377 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wyrZGCW-9gzD for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8612C66B75 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1M8KWP-0005zC-Fa for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:17 +0000 Received: from 82.152.195.85 ([82.152.195.85]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:17 +0000 Received: from slong by 82.152.195.85 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 24 May 2009 20:42:17 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steven J Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: The fallacies of GLEP55 Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 21:40:57 +0100 Organization: Friendly-Coders Message-ID: <1406872.nE9sQqAtnR@news.friendly-coders.info> References: <200905142006.51998.patrick@gentoo.org> <20090515201757.4dd324dd@snowmobile> <1876706.o0cNKnX3bN@news.friendly-coders.info> <200905152132.52553.levertond@googlemail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.195.85 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: e805e87a-b5ac-446a-9e74-f91e074dd1e2 X-Archives-Hash: 17284aac3b5597f0d8d443a600c35bad David Leverton wrote: > On Friday 15 May 2009 21:06:13 Steven J Long wrote: >> In practical terms, this is a useless proposal. It rightly got trashed >> last year. > > No, it did not get "trashed", despite some people's attempts to make their > side sound more popular than it really is. Yes there's a lot of that about. > Some people like the idea, some don't, and people have put forward > various arguments in both directions. Well that adds a lot. Suffice to say that some people not only dislike the idea but actually think it's a massively retrograde step, going as it does against basic Software Engineering principles some of us have seen the reason for at the coalface. (You know, where there are real consequences to getting things wrong, that will affect your real-life, your home and your family.) > If it were really as widely hated as you claim (presumably with the > implication that the people who still support it are horrible and evil for > even thinking about it) Hmm way to go putting thoughts in my head that aren't there. I realise you're very good at couching your assertions in language that can later be denied, but that only really works in this situation. Try it in the workplace and see how far you get. > then it wouldn't still be under discussion. Or alternatively, some people just can't take 'no' for an answer, and conceding even one flaw is too much for someone's ego, especially in the conduct of what appears to be a concerted campaign to get Gentoo to admit they were "wrong" to take whatever action they took so many years ago. (Only not in so many words. Apparently, ceding control of the direction of all future innovation will suffice to heal the wound.) -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)