Re: [Gnu-arch-users] community spirit

[Andrew Suffield]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 11:45:43AM -0800, Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
>     > From: Andrew Suffield <address@hidden>
> 
>     > On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 07:36:41PM -0800, Thomas Lord wrote:
>     > > They did not make even the slightest attempt to alert me before
>     > > announcing a fork.  Whether they describe that fork as "friendly" or
>     > > not, the creation of the fork was not only not conducted in a friendly
>     > > manner, it was not conducted in a civil manner, given the way they
>     > > have presented it on the GNU Arch lists.
> 
>     > This is SOP for Canonical. I don't think anybody outside Canonical
>     > really takes them seriously on that "community focus" and "friendly"
>     > stuff (any more than they do for, say, redhat, mandrake, or suse, who
>     > all claim the same stuff and act in more or less the same way). It's
>     > just another vendor running around forking everything to avoid having
>     > to deal with upstream authors.
> 
> At the risk of contributing to a cult of personality: nah -- mark is
> weirder and, one hopes, saner than that.  You can't be as much of a
> statistical outlier as he without aquiring at least /some/ beneficial
> world weariness.

I only account for actions, not hippie optimisim. Reasons and
hypotheticals are only of peripheral interest to me; in every
practical respect, Canonical behave just like all the other commercial
vendors. Right down to the PR (both official and personal) and
groupies.

[I observe that this suggests the cause for this behaviour is not the
need to make a profit. Perhaps it's the need to justify their own
existence that does it].

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature