[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: A Closer Look at GNU AutoTools

From: John Calcote
Subject: RE: A Closer Look at GNU AutoTools
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 10:40:20 -0600

> > I honestly don't get why you have a problem with this attitude in open
> > source software.
> This is not an open source software problem.  It's your attitude problem,
> is being reflected in single open source software project.
>   There is nothing in the source code that forces people to lash at anyone
> who points a problem in a manual.  You decide to lash at others on your
> Take responsibility for your own personal actions.
> > It's not a bad attitude - it's a natural attitude.
> It's a terrible attitude, and it's not natural.  Even if it comes out
naturally to
> you, it is not natural.  Plus, it does not help the project in any way,
> actually only harms it.

Ok - I can see upon rereading my message how my presentation might have been
a *little bit* abrasive, but I don't believe I deserve the sort of response
I got. I want to apologize up front to the Autotools community for any harm
I may have caused. It was never my intent - my intent was only to elucidate.

(And for the sake of completeness, let me again point out the mistake I made
using the term "open source software" instead of "free software". I
understand the difference and I just wasn't careful. FSF and the Autotools
projects are all about free software.)

>  > You're
> > trying to treat the Autotools as if a paid team of developers
> Your accusation is absolutely absurd.  No one is expecting that a bunch of
> people contributing their free time for something that essentially is a
> are here to take orders or to do something users are told to.
> No one is giving out orders or demanding anything.  The only thing that's
> been pointed out is that the manual has problems.

I guess I misunderstood. So help me understand - why send a message to the
list stating how bad the manual is if you don't hope someone on the list
will read your message and decide to update the manual accordingly? Isn't it
reasonable to assume in the face of such negative criticism that the poster
wants something to be done about the problem?

> That's it.
> Then, after you've reacted in a completely unhelpful and anti-social way
> in the process made your attitude problem also a autoconf problem, the
> problems caused by your attitude were also flagged.
> As this is supposed to be a FLOSS project that's open to any contribution,
> only difference between the "developers" you've referred to and others
> me is whether someone is currently working on a contribution to submit to
> And here you are, lashing out at anyone based on you fake notion of who is
> and who isn't a developer.
> Your attitude problem becomes even more pathetic when you start to talk
> about wishing others contributed to.  You, and people who act like you,
> away any potential contributor.

It's strange to me that you use phrases like "pathetic" and "lash out" and
"fake notion" and "you and people like you", but then you call me
anti-social and abrasive. The words I used were not even on the same level
as these.

Well, I seriously apologize for any pain I caused anyone with my response. I
want you to know that I am not a developer on the Autotools projects, or
even a minor contributor (one or two contributions does not a contributor
make). Please don't bring the projects down based on my comments. The people
that spend their time on these lists answering questions and the developers
of the tools are always courteous and responsive. 

I'll shut up now.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]