4 ms·

> But none of those ways have anything to do with open source More bad arguments! He didn't say that open source is unique. Perhaps he's simply talking about t

> But none of those ways have anything to do with open source More bad arguments! He didn't say that open source is unique. Perhaps he's simply talking about the communities he's actually involved in. > equating a concept with people I don't think you do get it. Nothing about Lennart's terminology is particularly unusual - the 'open source community' in standard parlance is a fairly well defined set of people, organisations and forums that isn't particularly controversial to refer to. I think you really are just using different words as everyone else to mean the same things.

Mikeb85 12y ago
> Perhaps he's simply talking about the communities he's actually involved in. Then he should have said 'The communities I'm involved in are awful'. And I'd agree. I didn't realize he made PulseAudio and Systemd (or was involved in some way). I personally don't mind either project (neither have harmed my Linux experience, Pulse is convenient for my uses), and I think both get a lot of unwarranted criticism. Not least for the fact that, with open source, you don't HAVE to be stuck with anything you don't want to be. > I don't think you do get it. Nothing about Lennart's terminology is particularly unusual - the 'open source community' in standard parlance is a fairly well defined set of people, organisations and forums that isn't particularly controversial to refer to. I think you really are just using different words as everyone else to mean the same things. See, this is the thing. I'm not part of that community. I could care less. But the reason why conversations like this aren't useful, is that you're equating a specific group of people with a concept, but criticizing the concept. Posts like this find their way outside the community. They give fodder to those who would like to see all software be closed source. They aren't helpful. Again, he should be far more explicit in what he's actually criticizing...
- inclemnet 12y ago
  > Then he should have said 'The communities I'm involved in are awful Luckily he doesn't need to, because (as above) he's obviously talking about the open source community. > I could care less You couldn't care less. I really think none of your criticisms are a real problem, or that there's any real ambiguity. I won't keep replying, it doesn't seem useful.
  - Mikeb85 12y ago
    > Luckily he doesn't need to, because (as above) he's obviously talking about the open source community. Which open-source community? The Linux kernel community is very different from say, the Haskell community (which is also very invested in open-source). > You couldn't care less. You accuse me of splitting hairs on semantics, yet you choose to correct me here. You understood what I meant, local slang here (for better or for worse) is to say what I wrote (even if it's not 100% gramatically correct), but you are more than willing to criticise me for not 'accepting' ambiguous language for something that should be 'obvious' to 'the open-source community'...

Mikeb85 12y ago

> Perhaps he's simply talking about the communities he's actually involved in. Then he should have said 'The communities I'm involved in are awful'. And I'd agree. I didn't realize he made PulseAudio and Systemd (or was involved in some way). I personally don't mind either project (neither have harmed my Linux experience, Pulse is convenient for my uses), and I think both get a lot of unwarranted criticism. Not least for the fact that, with open source, you don't HAVE to be stuck with anything you don't want to be. > I don't think you do get it. Nothing about Lennart's terminology is particularly unusual - the 'open source community' in standard parlance is a fairly well defined set of people, organisations and forums that isn't particularly controversial to refer to. I think you really are just using different words as everyone else to mean the same things. See, this is the thing. I'm not part of that community. I could care less. But the reason why conversations like this aren't useful, is that you're equating a specific group of people with a concept, but criticizing the concept. Posts like this find their way outside the community. They give fodder to those who would like to see all software be closed source. They aren't helpful. Again, he should be far more explicit in what he's actually criticizing...

inclemnet 12y ago
> Then he should have said 'The communities I'm involved in are awful Luckily he doesn't need to, because (as above) he's obviously talking about the open source community. > I could care less You couldn't care less. I really think none of your criticisms are a real problem, or that there's any real ambiguity. I won't keep replying, it doesn't seem useful.
- Mikeb85 12y ago
  > Luckily he doesn't need to, because (as above) he's obviously talking about the open source community. Which open-source community? The Linux kernel community is very different from say, the Haskell community (which is also very invested in open-source). > You couldn't care less. You accuse me of splitting hairs on semantics, yet you choose to correct me here. You understood what I meant, local slang here (for better or for worse) is to say what I wrote (even if it's not 100% gramatically correct), but you are more than willing to criticise me for not 'accepting' ambiguous language for something that should be 'obvious' to 'the open-source community'...