On 8/11/06, Rahul <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
[snip]
The painting/framing was done in Max Spevack's original statement which rhetorically counterbalanced a (non-existing AFAIK) "desire to not make concessions to proprietary software vendors" versus "the very real problem of unnecessarily breaking the systems of users". /That/ is a very particular and ideological take on the problem, and it's annoying because it's certainly not what some of us are arguing, but it purports to represent the only two-sides of the coin.
Anyway, this is all hot air if the decision is already made, but it's not very impressive that /my/ user experience of "yum upgrade xorg" to get better free software is being sacrificed so that someone else's non-free software is left where it is.
Best wishes,
Oisin
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
[snip]
> Put yet another way, upgrading X.org isn't about punishing vendors of
> proprietary drivers, it's about _rewarding_ vendors of open source
> drivers.
[snip]
You can pain it as a idealogical battle if you want
to but that's not what this is about at all.
The painting/framing was done in Max Spevack's original statement which rhetorically counterbalanced a (non-existing AFAIK) "desire to not make concessions to proprietary software vendors" versus "the very real problem of unnecessarily breaking the systems of users". /That/ is a very particular and ideological take on the problem, and it's annoying because it's certainly not what some of us are arguing, but it purports to represent the only two-sides of the coin.
Anyway, this is all hot air if the decision is already made, but it's not very impressive that /my/ user experience of "yum upgrade xorg" to get better free software is being sacrificed so that someone else's non-free software is left where it is.
Best wishes,
Oisin
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
