On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 15:18, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote: > DJB imposes restrictions which I find unreasonable and in detriment to the > benefit and welfare of software users and system administrators like > myself. Furthermore, I find the software, the irrational blind insistence > that it's perfect, the disregard of RFC's, the unwillingness to update and > change with the times, and the general fanaticism and hostility of /some/ > qmail users to be, frankly, repulsive. So I choose to use and recommend > either Sendmail or Postfix, both of whose weighted pros/cons I find > preferable to qmail. Me as well, however... > Anyone who agrees with me is welcome to their opinion, and so is anyone who > does not. Thankfully, the Fedora Project's goals do and, as a member of > this community, I shall lobby for those goals and objectives not to be changed. This bothers me. Why limit the choices of others? I'm not arguing for DJB software here, I'm arguing for the principle of the thing. Personally, I think Fedora should build the best, kick-ass system, whether that means the inclusion of packages that are not strictly open source or even fully closed source, as long as the distribution rights can be secured and we're well within the law here. I mean, sheesh, Microsoft limits my choices by telling computer makers which packages should or should not be included in the system they sell me. It smacks of the same thing if the Fedora community starts doing the same thing. Now, whether or not you choose to use a particular package based on its license scheme, I can fully understand that. But please don't make me jump through hoops to add back in by hand all the things that you deem inappropriate. -- Dave Roberts <ldave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
