Re: ion3 license

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:25:50 -0000, Tuomo Valkonen <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2007-12-17, Joerg van den Hoff <[email protected]> wrote:
>> a) ion3 has been removed from `macports' which is the MacOSX
>> package management system.
>
> Good.

Really - You think that's good?
I really do question your sanity at times, more recently than ever before.  
You have written, and published, a pretty decent WM, but don't seem to  
want anyone to benefit from it.

Simply adding the message you want to the top of the ion man page, and  
that "informational" window that you get first time you run ion really  
ought to be enough to say "this package may not be the latest available -  
check tuomo's site". TBH - I'd not care if that popped up every time I ran  
ion (once every 6 months or so, whenever I have a power cut).


>> I  think  it really would be a wise and nice thing to do and
>> draw a line at demanding some unambigous info in the package
>> that  it's none of your buiseness if an old version does not
>> work  as  expected.  enforcing  "under   cover"   names   is
>> ridiculous.
>
> This distros are mostly composed of ridiculuous fuckwits and
> dickheads -- ex school bullies who can only package and corrupt
> others' software -- if even that -- and not actually write new
> software, let alone something that wouldn't be a clone (the whole
> FOSS movement is incapable of that). They consider it "unreasonable"
> and impossible to add prominent notices that I will have nothing
> to do with their obsolete and modified shit. Renaming is the
> alternative to that.

So anyone who doesn't spend all their time recompiling software for what  
is, for most people, a tool and nothing more, is an idiot according to you.
Well, I almost exclusively use binary packages - because they make my life  
easier.  And yes I expect them ALL to behave the same way. If you're  
writing a distro then that level of consistency in your package management  
is important. Adding prominent messages to ion (the program, not a special  
case in the package handler) is much easier.  People who hate it strongly  
enough can simply compile it out if they want (or you could add a config  
option) - package maintainers won't bother.

>> otherwise  this  seems  a sure strategy to finish `ion3' off
>> outside of a _very_ small group. I'm sure you would'nt  care
>> but need you enforce such a thing?
>
> I don't want to have anything to do with the typical specimen of
> the FOSS herd. I rather deal with a handful of nice and intelligent
> people.

You'd rather deal with yourself and only yourself - you've demonstrated  
this arrogance before, and will do again.  It's a shame that I don't have  
the time to write a tiling WM myself, because I actually think that a  
couple of us here could do a very good job of it.

John

-- 
John Robson