Linux is not about choice [was Re: Fedora too cutting edge?]

[Patrice Dumas]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:29:50AM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> 
> > Indeed. This was an extreme example to avoid getting in the technical
> > argument, 
> 
> Interesting. So this is a concrete example of how your whole line of
> reasoning is filled with hyperbole. 

It is not an hyperbole (I guess that you mean exageration by this word), 
it is an example. I used that example because it allows to discuss about
choices. Choices that are done in the fedora community, that have
technical consequences.

> It seems you are using this
> hyperbole, along with mistaken notions of "freedom" and "diversity", as
> a platform for trying to argue that we should be more open to "choice". 

I personnally favour the openness to choice, but I am clearly not the only 
one to do such an important choice for fedora. It should be clear, however 
for fedora contributors what is acceptable.

> > but keep talking on the organisational issues.
> 
> So please take this *elsewhere*. I think we should stick to technical
> subjects on this list instead of coming up with wacky examples that is
> beyond ones comprehension. 

This is very important, in my opinion, to speak about organizational
subjects and not only strictly technical subjects. I think that what 
kind of packages are accepted in fedora is an important question for
the fedora community.

> All you have down here, Patrice, is to screw
> up the SN ratio of this list even more. 

That's possible, but not on purpose.

> (Seriously, I don't even know why I'm on this list anymore. Maybe we
> need a fedora-codemonkeys-list where we can ban people using hyperbole
> instead of sticking to technical facts and reality. Perhaps, someone
> could get even some work done on such a list.)

If this list is not for discussing which packages should be acceptable 
in fedora which list should be used for that? In my opinion this is the
list where the community members like me and you can voice their concerns.

--
Pat