Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, NightStrike wrote:
Ok, so again, I should be allowed to accept that *potential* risk as
being far less than the current situation of *actual* risk which is
causing problems. If I knew anything about Perl, I'd just do it
myself, but alas, the automake source confounds me :(
There is a philosophical stance that the software we develop is intended
for the software users rather than the software developer. There is a
problem if build behavior is different for the user than for the
software developer.
It seems that increasingly there is an idea among software developers
and maintainers that software developer satisfaction is more important
than user satisfaction.
Damn right there is, or i'd just be developing for Redmond.
Only with low development agro will developers be more motivated to fix
users problems. If that wasn't the case, i'd be programming in assembler.
Software lasts longer than any individual maintainer or developer and so
GNU build tools should strive to preserve the freedom of that software
by ensuring that end users are provided with the same facilities that
the original developers had available. This includes the list of files
which are included in the package.