"Bane" <branimir.milosavlje...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:hrk1oi$1o7...@digitalmars.com... > Gurney Halleck Wrote: > >> == Quote from Bane (branimir.milosavlje...@gmail.com)'s article >> > Nick Sabalausky Wrote: >> > > "Nick Sabalausky" <a...@a.a> wrote in message >> > > news:hrgbo5$fv...@digitalmars.com... >> > > > "Walter Bright" <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message >> > > > news:hrgag4$cp...@digitalmars.com... >> > > >> Jason House wrote: >> > > >>> It is my understanding that several Tango developers no longer >> > > >>> follow >> > > >>> digitalmars.D. I recommend posting to the Tango forums. >> > > >> >> > > >> If anyone would like to repost my message initiating this thread >> > > >> in the >> > > >> Tango forums, feel free. >> > > > >> > > > Done: http://www.dsource.org/projects/tango/forums/topic/878 >> > > > >> > > >> > > It seems to have been silently deleted...(???) >> > > >> > > >> > Yup, that's what Stalin would do :) >> > Joke aside, hot tempered discussion can't bring any good, so its better >> > that way. >> >> Srsly?!? Its better to censor Walters informative post because the Tango >> Komintern >> has no good retort? >> >> The dimwits tried to rewrite history once. They edited the title of Dons >> bug >> report. They failed to explain that too. This time the truth is out >> there. Tango >> leadership deserves no respect. >> > > I meant on topic removal from DM newsgroup. I guess Walther did it, as he > is the one administering it, right? I support his decision for a reason I > wrote above. >
I was talking about the post on Tango's forums that reposted Walter's OP. I haven't seen anything deleted on the NG. > As far of Tango leadership and respecting them, time will tell soon. If > Walther, Andrei and the rest of people that are making tremendously hard > work on D can put their ego aside (quest for fame), then what is to say > about people that (face it) do less with Tango and act like their work is > more important? > > Bottom line is that D should not suffer because of ego of individuals. I've read all the discussion, I think it's very clear (especially from Lars's mesage here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.d.phobos/359 ) thst there's been absolutely no ego involved, by anyone, at all. The whole thing was all about Walter being told that it may be possible that one of tango.time's writers could *IN THEORY* have a potentially legal complaint about SHOO's lib. I assume that Lars was the one who informed Walter of this (though I'm not certain), and if so, then *NOBODY* has actually made any complaint about *THEIR OWN* code being infringed!! Additionally, it's been made very clear that the whole binary attribution thing is staying in Tango *purely* because of difficulties in switching away from BSD (While I may disagree that sticking with BSD is the best thing for Tango to do, the important thing here is that ego doesn't have a damn thing to do with it). So can we finally knock it off with all the "someone has an ego" bullcrap? I fully expect Halleck to keep it up, but that's only because every post he's made here has been trolling, and trolls certainly aren't going to care about any reasonable argument that gets presented to them. But for everyone else: It's done, it's over, QED, there's no flaming egos, give it a rest.
