Re: News about the macro archive

[Guido Draheim]

Peter Simons wrote:
> 
> You are right that a fork may be regarded as a failure
> insofar as that I didn't manage to integrate Guido
> successfully in the project I was running already when he
> showed up. I am willing to accept _half_ the responsibility
> for that. [...]

Yeah, there's again that slight misconception, you know,
I had my macro archive even before you did show up on the
autoconf mailinglist *giggle* taken it was just a single
index page with no formatting for the macros which I was
assembling. So, when overtaking the formatter it made all
sense to merge the rest as well - which didn't quite
succeed. So, for the fifth generation (!) of my archive I
took over the name on the idea that a unification would
be about immediate. Well, that's some years ago ;-)

> 
> I used to, but I don't think that anymore. The ideas I have
> for the Autoconf Macro Archive seem to vary wildly from the
> ones other people have. Since this is a project I do in my
> spare time, I am not interested in going through the immense
> effort of finding consensus, I am interested in running the
> archive I want to run.

I disagree here fundamentally, assembling the macros
should be a service for the community, the opinion
of the maintainer is meaningless when it gets in
conflict with the users and submitters (which are
often the same). Actually, it would need to be
the other way round: if you have an idea then it
would need to be you to convince "the other people"
and to resolve carefully any problems in a nice and
friendly tone.

> [...]
> I disagree. You have no right to speak as if you knew what
> "the masses" want. You quite simply don't know it! With the
> same right you speak for the masses, I could say _I_ speak
> for them. As a matter of fact, I have been having a LOT more
> contact with users of the archive than you did, and everyone
> except those rare exceptions here on the list seems to be
> pretty enthusiastic, actually.

*ROTFL* just the thanks that the project exists, well, that
is not the same as being satisfied with the way it was in
details. So, who was enthusiastic about your details last?

-- have fun, guido