-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Matt Parker matt@mpcontracting.co.uk wrote:
On Sunday 06 November 2005 14:53, Brett Parker wrote:
Matt Parker matt@mpcontracting.co.uk wrote:
<snippage class="Excessive" />
Don't care what you say. I have work to do. I don't want my distribution to require me to spend days Googling to work out how to install my software. I want to tick the boxes in the installer/package manager, have it resolve any dependencies, and then find it in my menu.
OK - so what *do* you use then that has such a package mangler that has the diversity of software available in debian? And who needs to google, 3 seconds on #debian-uk or #alug on OFTC will get you an answer very quickly. 99% of the battle is knowing where to look... If your distribution didn't have xyz package, what steps would you take to make sure that the package list used by the distribution wasn't nuked by you doing a make install and it randomly overwriting some critical libraries (been there, done that, got the damned t-shirt).
SuSE Pro 9.3
Ah - so you use a distribution that has enough commercial clout, and no social agreement, to actually distribute the JDK... I see you avoided answering the second part of the question though... I assume that you build rpms to stop this from happening... now, what's the difference between having to google to find how to build the rpm and having to google to find how to build a .deb?
As for licensing, to be honest I don't care about that as long as the license gives me the right to use it.
Being a sys admin, you've just made me cringe. So, how do you know that you have the right to use the software, precisely, without reading the licence?
Because I *do* read the license, carefully. Anything that I'm in doubt about goes in front of my lawyer.
Right - so why the hell say you don't care about them, then... Would you please stop being so damned flippant and actually say what you mean?
I use Linux because I prefer it to Windows, not because I have a particular bee in my bonnet about software licensing (that would be hypocritical since I happen to write closed source software myself - though I also write open source [Apache licensed as it happens] software as well).
You write closed source software... good for you, I hope that you've checked the licences for the libraries that you're using and that you're not violating them... oh, no, wait... you don't care about licencing... please provide me with a list of software that you develop so that I know what to steer clear of, it's bound to be stupidly licenced, and probably breaking licences of other software.
You're a moron. I don't break the licenses of the libraries I use (nearly all Apache license varients or BSD - I steer clear of GPL/LGPL for this reason). Nearly everything I do is audited by Deloittes (since I do a lot of Government work) and they're VERY hot on this sort of thing.
Nice, direct attack. Love it. I'm a moron because you can't actually say what you mean. typical closed source developer mentality at work there.
Just because I write closed-source software doesn't mean I'm some kind of vampire who steals from the open-source community.
I don't care wether you do or don't, but I certainly don't want to touch software written by someone that can't actually decide wether they do or do not like licences. Here - have some garlic, just incase :P
- -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk