Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release

[Paul Hedderly]

On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:07:13AM -0500, Mark A. Flacy wrote:
> >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Hedderly <address@hidden> writes:
> Paul> 
> Paul> On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 10:02:55PM -0500, Mark A. Flacy wrote:
> >> 
> >> Bugs remaining:
> >> 
> >> - build hopelessly broken on anything other than the version of Debian
> >> used by the author. (OK, that's hyperbole.  It's certainly broken with
> >> "GNU Make 3.80" )
> >> 
> >> - no information from the make file to tell what version of ANYTHING that
> >> is required to build tlator.
> >> 
> >> - no information in ANY OTHER FILE in the tarball to tell victims what
> >> versions of tools are required to build tlator.
> >> 
> >> These are old problems, solved by automake and autoconf a long, long, long
> >> time ago.  For crying out loud, could you at least provide the 3rd bullet
> >> in your next release?  
> >> 
> >> Sheesh.
> Paul> 
> Paul> Mark, I understand your frustration, and I would also understand the
> Paul> tone of your mail... if you were paying for this software. I would
> Paul> rather have seen a "thankyou for the code, but there are some problems
> Paul> which could be solved with the autol* tools such as ..."
> 
> I see.  You wanted me to say "Thank you for the code that I cannot compile
> upon my system.  Thank you for not providing any information in the code to
> tell me what I would need to compile the code on any system, much less my
> own.  Thank you for requesting my time and effort to evaluate your software
> without the providing the least amount of effort to indicate to me the
> tools required to do so.  Thank you for reinforcing the concept in some
> people's minds (not my own) that Open Source software is written by
> amateurs for amateurs." 

For the record, no. That is not what I said, nor what I intended.

> Yes, I can do that.

But it would be silly.

--
Paul