On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Yuri K. Shatroff <yks-...@yandex.ru> wrote: > Thanks, it really doesn't look like forcing. > On the higher level, there must be some politics going on; that's also not > forcing, but politics. On the lower level (that of users) one's always got > the worst case to demonstrate there's no forcing. But why not go "the best > case"? It's a big mistake to think that developing software is about writing > code; NO! it's about communication.
The arrogance of some posters in this thread is that they think "because I've never heard of it, it didn't happen". Newsflash, you're not omniscient. FACT of the matter is: pulseaudio's purpose was well-communicated by the original designer. Its adoption by major distributions was openly announced and widely discussed by the people of the relevant teams. /run was communicated to and independently agreed on by the teams of all major distros. /usr's merge and the rationale behind it was publicly announced. systemd's design documents and documentation are all out in the open... Just because you don't like it and avoid "his" blog like plague, doesn't mean they aren't talking. Or by communication, do you mean something else? Like "get users to vote on every color and doodad of the system"? Because that's not how open source works. Remember Linus' informal title? Benevolent _Dictator_. Open source does not mean democracy. It simply and exactly means that you can choose to be free from their control if you wanted. What more should they do? Go to your house and offer to fix your PC for you? That's just entitlement. -- This email is: [ ] actionable [ ] fyi [x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [x] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate [ ] soon [x] none
