Re: planning 2.0?

Peter Conrad <[email protected]> writes:

> You have to balance cost against usefulness. If 8.3 filenames 
> were the limit on today's windows, the usefulness of sticking
> to the limit would probably outweigh the cost.

I'd like to point out that this is clearly a political argument --- I
can't believe that you'd honestly defend such a technical flaw.

Basically, you seem to imply that Windows support is important nowadays
because Microsoft has (almost) a monopoly; you then deduce that free
software projects should thus abide by the technical rules set by
Microsoft, no matter how bit-rotten they are, no matter what
alternatives exist, etc.

I personally do not support such arguments.

Thanks,
Ludovic.