On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Ludovic Court?s wrote:
Peter Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
You have to balance cost against usefulness. If 8.3 filenames
were the limit on today's windows, the usefulness of sticking
to the limit would probably outweigh the cost.
I'd like to point out that this is clearly a political argument --- I
can't believe that you'd honestly defend such a technical flaw.
Basically, you seem to imply that Windows support is important nowadays
because Microsoft has (almost) a monopoly; you then deduce that free
software projects should thus abide by the technical rules set by
Microsoft, no matter how bit-rotten they are, no matter what
alternatives exist, etc.
I personally do not support such arguments.
OK, and what about if some free software developers do need to support
Windows to fulfill their user needs and they decide to use your RCS for
development?
If you are taking political view into account, then please also think
about more broad picture than just your narrow DRCS view.
Cheers,
Karel
--
Karel Gardas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ObjectSecurity Ltd. http://www.objectsecurity.com
_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
