compatibility and the OSD

[Chuck Swiger]

Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Chuck Swiger (cswiger at mac.com):
[ ... ]
>> Rick, insulting someone repeatedly and then claiming to be polite is 
>> dishonest.
> 
> I cannot help notice that the phrases you quoted make no
> characterisation of anyone in particular.

So?  You have a habit of switching from arguing about the point at hand to 
making personal attacks against the person you are debating-- Alex, in this 
case.  You don't think telling someone "your humble opinion has been duly 
noted and discarded" is insulting?

Let's try the Mom test:  No doubt, as a dutiful and loving child, you always 
give your mother a bunch of roses on Mother's Day.  Lets say your mother 
expresses an opinion such as "gee, I really like the color red", and you 
respond to her, "Well, Mom, your humble opinion has been duly noted and 
discarded."

[ Things one probably wouldn't say to one's mother, even in a joking tone, are 
probably insulting.  You get the point, Rick? ]

> In fact, none but the last one even _mentions_ anyone in particular, and
> then only to say that I'm withholding my view.

That's right.  You were responding to a point of fact-- Alex was making an 
observation about what you said you had done reviewing licenses at 
SourceForge-- with a blanket dismisal of his point and a slam at SF.

>> I agree with Alex Rousskov's point.  There are plenty of people on this 
>> list who were doing open source long before Bruce Perens came up with the 
>> predecessor to the OSD in 1997.  
> 
> Despite having the gravest of respect, warmest and friendliest regard,
> and best wishes for your no doubt admirable opinions, I am obliged to
> remind you that antecedent discussion concerned the _term_ "open source"
> (in the software context), not _doing_ open source.

L.E. Modesitt does that better than you do, but this wasn't bad.

Anyway, did you have a point to make?  People were talking about "open 
software", "open standards", and even "open source" before 1997 on Usenet, 
although "free software" was undoubtedly the more common term back then.

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=0mFRwQG00UzxE2UUVt%40andrew.cmu.edu&output=gplain

...from 1996, for instance, is not too far off-topic considering the recent 
discussions with Bob Scheifler about compatibility tests and Java.

-- 
-Chuck