On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 20:22 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > This is the trade off we have chosen. We give up long term API and ABI > stability to achieve cleaner, better, more maintainable code. We can > do this because we can fix application code ourselves if their own > developers refuse to. Microsoft does not have that option. And of > course this means we constantly get accused by various asshats who > simply Don't Get It that we're "actively breaking things" and > "sabotaging everyone" and "refusing to cooperate". It is closed > vendors like Nvidia who are refusing to cooperate in our open process. > Seriously, go back to Windows. You do not belong here. Yes I'm talking > to you, Les. GTFO You were doing really well up to the last couple of lines. Please, let's try to keep things civil. I know it's frustrating when community members have to explain open source fundamentals repeatedly. This might make good fodder for a FAQ entry, to which you could simply point. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
