On the right to rant.
-
@Gąska The point was that the software (in this hypothetical scenario Linux) was fit for purpose first and had an acceptable license, then was made not fit for purpose after, in a way that was easily removable and in line with the license.
The idea of releasing free software first, then "morally" dictating usage after it's in wide use is ridiculous. Set up your terms first, don't bait and switch.
-
-
@TimeBandit BTW I just noticed that in your first reply (one where you make fun of the highly hypothetical scenario I presented), you quoted the entire paragraph from my post... except the words "in this highly hypothetical scenario". You should get a job at CNN.
-
@blakeyrat said in On the right to rant.:
@sockpuppet7 You guys are going to be so surprised when you figure out I'm Donald Trump.
Actually I've called that one already:
@topspin said in Re: In other news today... Rhywden is being an ANGRY GERMAN:
@blakeyrat said in Re: In other news today... Rhywden is being an ANGRY GERMAN:
You have really shitty media?
A response directly out of the Trump playbook.
-
@izzion said in On the right to rant.:
Because the mindset of “oh this isn’t THAT critical, I’ll do it later” is what leads bachelor pads to have a sink full of dirty dishes, underwear all over the floor, and three bags of trash bursting full and waiting to go to the dumpster.
I'll have you know I have only one bag of trash (overflowing, not bursting) — well, two if you count the bathroom, but it hardly ever gets that full.
-
@TimeBandit said in On the right to rant.:
@topspin said in On the right to rant.:
"morally" dictating usage after
That's the opposite of Free
Some would say that the GPL isn't really "free", since it actually puts strong restrictions on what the user of the code can do with it.
(inb4: of course that's not the only Free license around, but it's the most widely used)
-
@remi "freedom" is surprisingly vague term - like socialism, it means different things to different people, often mutually exclusive.
-
@TimeBandit said in On the right to rant.:
@topspin said in On the right to rant.:
"morally" dictating usage after
That's the opposite of Free
Only morally.
-
@dkf what about ethically.
-
@boomzilla said in On the right to rant.:
Like all of the people who continue to use old versions of Word to do write their documents.
I'm somewhat sad that my version of Office 2003 is sliiightly more buggy since the latest Win10 anniversacreator update.
Granted, I blame the virtualization software, Thinstall 4.2 is just as outdated.
It's a unique message I've never seen from svchost...
The version I packaged of 2007 is also apparently busted.
-
@TimeBandit said in On the right to rant.:
like teenagers insisting they would remain chaste without the watchful eye of the nun.
What can the nun do anyway?
Slap them with rulers? Some people get off on that stuff, you know...
-
@sockpuppet7 said in On the right to rant.:
Someone did port xscreensaver against his wishes
GitHub - katahiromz/XScreenSaverWin: XScreenSaver for Windows
XScreenSaver for Windows. Contribute to katahiromz/XScreenSaverWin development by creating an account on GitHub.
TIL. Now I gotta try it, despite not using screensavers since I had a Matrix one...
-
-
@topspin said in On the right to rant.:
@Tsaukpaetra quoted in On the right to rant.:
mayn't
Really?!
Especially considering they didn't use can't right above it... 😒
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in On the right to rant.:
mayn't
I appreciate people trying to make the distinction between can and may, but in this case if there's a technical issue preventing you, then you can't put so many .scr files in one folder directly.
-
@heterodox the user SHALLN'T put so many .scr files in one folder directly.
-
@Gąska shan't
-
-
@Jaloopa The correct one is "shouldn't", because he may and can, but the resulting mess is his own problem.
-
@heterodox said in On the right to rant.:
I appreciate people trying to make the distinction between can and may, but in this case if there's a technical issue preventing you, then you can't put so many .scr files in one folder directly.
Sure you can. They just won't work.
The correct word is "shouldn't". You "shouldn't" put too many in one folder or the product may crash. The or part is also important, your audience will just say "you can't tell me what to do!" and do it anyway without that.
-
@blakeyrat The grandmotherly kindest designers never provide the consequences; this encourages learning.
-
I've been quite a long time heavy user of Debby but I have to be honest it is rant worthy. First I liked that Debby (ironically early on was beneficial having a relatively small simple footprint compared to some more ambitious distros) and its fork Ubuntu tended to have a lot of packages compared to things like stock Centos. After a while though I noticed quality issues. Then I ended up getting into packaging and this is where debian really reveals itself. Centos is dead simple most of the time. It tries not to deviate too much away from the make scripts packages come with.
There are exceptions to that but in general if I want to make a package in Centos it's just one little combined config and build script and a few commands to get it built and in a repo. Adding a repo is easy as well with very little to think about. Debian on the other hand, there's this skeleton with mystic files everywhere, a hundred ways to skin a cat and things like two convoluted ways or adding patches. I think the worst of it though is all the extras. Quite often when people package things for Debby, you have too much contribution (for more you contribute, the more you have to contribute, maintenance). All these extra scripts and reconfiguration away from defaults as well as random patches from all over the place get pulled in (and not necessarily pushed upstream). In short, you ask for a skeleton package in Debian and you get a mass grave instead. It then also turns out packages are massively modded so something as simple as updating a package yourself with your own repo for when you need that (since Debby freezes version) becomes a major undertaking if you want to reuse the original source package from Debby.
As much as I might depend on Debby, in essence, when I look at these scripts and things which are all superfluous and bulbous (sometimes of a curious level of quality or convention), Debby is one big enormous rant, except it's written in things like bash and python. Rather than being in yur mailing list or forum it's in yur packages, file system, executables, climbing in yur windows, etc.
-
@First-Last said in On the right to rant.:
I've been quite a long time heavy user of Debby
Is this the same Debby that Does Dallas?
-
@First-Last Oh, welcome to the forums!
