Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > Deeeuuuuude, that's not what you're saying over on SVLUG. I quote: > > * Far as I can tell, Devuan was a operatic overreaction, and by no means > the most efficient way to deal with the problem. > > * "Nor did it merit a fork, IMO." > > * "The whole forking thing seemed like gratuitous drama, really. Just > my opinion."
This doesn't contradict what I said, in any way -- and, for some reason, you are choosing not to quote the bits where I _specifically said_ on the SVLUG list that I think Devuan's work is valuable and that I appreciate it (which I also said in my Web page). Moreover, Jaromir has known me as a fan of Devuan for a lot longer than you've been in contact with me. I would accordingly appreciate your prompt and full public apology. > You'd be amazed at the number of people who mock Devuan, who are angry > at Devuan, who say bad things about Devuan. This drama has nothing to do with me. > You've said a number of times that forking isn't necessary because you > can do your Debian package manager-foo. That is not what I said. > In fact, the outcome of Ian Jackson's GR enforces their right to such > sabotage. That is not an accurate representation of the GR outcome, which I already wasted time explaining to you. (As a reminder, I have no connection to the Debian Project. I am just a system administrator who uses some of its stuff, and is sometimes obliged to take measures to reverse some of its policies and practices.) > Although all forks ruffle feathers a little bit.... {shrug} No concern of mine. I've been explaining to people the essential role of forking in open source since at least that 1999 essay that Slashdot picked up. http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Licensing_and_Law/forking.html _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng