X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 8 Jul 2017 23:04:14 +0000
From:	"Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Trolling and free software responsibility
Message-ID:	<20170708230414.GV12397@stuge.se>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<F9CD7D04-ED74-4E0E-A1E0-54A24DE37703@noqsi.com>
	<228610BF-A7B9-4562-A6A7-ECDFC5C051B2 AT noqsi DOT com>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Hi John,

what you did in this thread is absolutely unacceptable, and you
need to watch yourself so that you never do it again in this
community, or in any other. I will try to point it out clearly:

John Doty wrote:
> using our traditional foundation, Scheme
..
> We’ve been well served by Scheme in the past.

You say that you do not want to change, away from Scheme.


John Doty wrote:
> > By now, the refactored code is 100% compatible with existing Scheme code.
> 
> But that’s no advance.

Then you criticize that the refactored code is backwards compatible,
made so such that you (and others) don't *need* to change, away from Scheme.


This is as clear a case of trolling as there ever will be, which is
completely unacceptable, and you need to stop it or GTFO - immediately!


> A valid criticism, but Vladimir is moving the boundary so that more
> functionality is implemented in Scheme.  That’s especially helpful
> to me because more is therefore exposed to customization.

I know that there are people who are excited about the intersection
of Scheme and gEDA, which is cool, but I support Roland's approach
and effort to move away from Scheme, simply because it is more
sustainable. The Scheme cost/benefit ratio is far too high.

This being free software you have the freedom (and responsibility!)
to maintain your own project when you disagree with other projects.

What you don't have if you disagree, is a right to occupy other
peoples' time.


> It was not easier for *me* to understand (obviously it is for you).
..
> To a Schemer, Vladimir’s approach is more transparent.

Great! Work with that project, and stay silent about others.


> But the real question is whether either approach will attract
> add-on authors the way Ales’s Scheme API did.

I think Roland's effort has created more potential for it.


//Peter

- Raw text -