On 6 March 2015 at 17:11, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> It is a two way street. You own the device. They make the OS. Each is
> their own 'ball' if I am using your original metaphor appropriately. Each
> sees the other as the field the ball gets played on. If you don't like the
> field that your ball is playing on you are free to ask for something to be
> changed. If it doesn't get changed you can go find another field to play
> on. And vice versa.
The idea that the OS manufacturers get to control what you do with your
machine is a totally proprietary attitude that absolutely goes against the
spirit of Free Software. This control-freakiness is exactly what we hate
about proprietary software!
Kevin Kofler
Here is my point .
Here is where you guys think it is ----------<30 light years>----------------> .
The point I am worried about is that Chris and you are treating this as a binary problem versus a spectrum one.
I am more worried about the general case of the process of this 'request for change'. If all it is going to take to make a team do something would be a lot of email requests.. what happens when every person you ever peeved off starts a thread on moving KDE back to 3.5 because the current software interferes with their hardware. If it is their ball and you have to do whatever they say... I can see a LOT of petty wars brought up, fought and no one winning. [And no one say 'common sense' will prevent that. When most every email has been assailing the others decision as lack of common sense.. we already threw that out.]
I would say that this is madness.. but I am afraid that someone will kick me in a well and say that this is Fedora.
Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
