From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mathieu Lirzin Subject: Re: [PATCH] ui: 'package->recutils' serializes the source field. Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 01:56:34 +0200 Message-ID: <87ziombyrx.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160805145804.26753-1-david@craven.ch> <87y44af52m.fsf@gmail.com> <87shuit01e.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg60g79l.fsf@gnu.org> <87a8gog154.fsf@gnu.org> <87vazcce0a.fsf@gnu.org> <87r39zcfkz.fsf@gnu.org> <871t1zoz98.fsf@gmail.com> <87invbc6hn.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58059) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bWuPT-00006T-5S for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Aug 2016 19:56:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bWuPO-0008E5-7c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Aug 2016 19:56:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: (David Craven's message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2016 00:58:06 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: David Craven Cc: guix-devel , Alex Kost David Craven writes: > Sometimes it's hard to admit when you are wrong, but I think in > practice people barely take notice if you quickly admit you are > wrong and move on. If you drag it out, people are definitively > going to remember. > > Claiming that you applied logic to arrive at the conclusion that > > - Providing a user tool to fetch a tarball > - Displaying a direct link to a tarball in our UI > > are the same thing is nonsense. If I disagree with you doesn't mean I am wrong. Please don't act as if you were in a position to decide who is wrong. Trying to persuade me that it would be better for my reputation to agree with you won't work. > Asking me to start a discussion on the linux-libre mailing list over > this is an unreasonable request. Being careful about FSDG compliance is not unreasonable. > The only way I can see these two things being equal is if you > say: > > class Thing > class UserTool extends Thing > class DirectLink extends Thing > > typeof UserTool == typeof DirectLink ;-) > > I had a class on java - which I didn't attend - and passed > an exam - but I never wrote a single line of java. Pretty > interesting what will pass as a java programmer don't you > think? =P Sorry, but I don't understand what you are trying to say. -- Mathieu Lirzin