Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 May 2006 17:07:56 -0400
From:      Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>
To:        Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: X.Org 7.0 port?
Message-ID:  <200605101707.56550.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060510201424.GA1679@soaustin.net>
References:  <200605041507.08581.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <200605081028.09756.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20060510201424.GA1679@soaustin.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
середа 10 травень 2006 16:14, Mark Linimon написав:

> 2. You have ignored the point that kris and I and anholt are trying to
>    make, that he is not obligated to fix your problem.

Rather, you have ignored my response to this accusation. I'll repeat:

The obligation exists. I can't quite express it, but it is the same 
obligation, that keeps everyone working on their bits and pieces of the 
project, respond to requests for help, follow-up on PRs... One can not take 
such obligation to court (luckily), but it still exists.

I guess, this piece of "common sense" is not so common, so I'll refer you to 
Saint-Exupery: "You are responsible, forever, for what you have tamed."

> It's fair to say "xyz doesn't work". It isn't fair to say "abc _must_ 
> fix xyz".  This model simply does not work with volunteers.

Even volunteers _must_ sometimes work on the unpleasant stuff to keep their 
project relevant... Pointing this out to them explicitly is usually a bad 
form, of course, but in this case the suggestion was solicited (that you were 
joking was not at all obvious).

Anyway, how about "_should_"?

	-mi



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605101707.56550.mi%2Bmx>