From: MJ Ray markj+0111@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk
Joerg Schilling schilling@fokus.gmd.de wrote:
If you like to pay, I believe you are welcome. But please do not state that you _need_ to pay.
But that is what the document says.
Digging (very) deep in that site, it appears that I may not have to pay now, but they "reserve the right to charge for HTML/PDF versions of its publications in the future". Only a fool would agree to pay an unspecified amount at an unspecified future date.
Please not not start to spread your assumptions, stay with the truth.
How can I make any other inference? I quote the truth as it is stated on their pages. If I agree to those terms, I agree to their right to charge me an unspecified amount at a future date. Sorry, but no. Either that is an unjust contract, or it is misworded.
Sorry, but I cannot find anything about money:
http://www.unix-systems.org/version3/online.html
You register and get access.
It yould be nice if I could go to my baker and ask him for free bread just bacause he could use my CD recording program for free.
As I'm sure you're aware, we cannot reproduce bread for free.
It becomes more and more disappointing to see how users of free software behave.
I'm an author, not just a user. Sure, nothing as widely-used as your program, but the users of my software seem to find it useful nonetheless.
So it seems that there are not so many people sending you mail.... I am receiving far too much mail.
In case of cdrecord it is really disappointing to see my workload constanly increasing because dumb and lazy people send me mail and nobody is willing to contribute to the project. If users continue to behave this way, many real free software authors will stop working on free software.
If "real free software authors" behave as you do, they find themselves forked anyway, so does it matter? Sorry to be harsh, but we're not all beggars at the table of the programmer kings. I think it's more of a
But most of the users of free software have become demanding - not begging.
If you like to know the difference, just write a program that people really are interested in. Maintain it for 5+ years and we may again discuss the result on your life.
POSIX contains SCCS but does not contain VCS.
Surely that is POSIX's flaw?
Why? SCCS uses the better file format, there is no reason to also put CVS into the standard. The CPIO archive format also has been finally removed in favor of TAR because it is not extensible.
Sorry, I was suggesting that POSIX should contain a Version Control System specification rather than just the SCCS file format.
If you read the standard you would know that it specifies the user interface to the version control system.
- NFS breaking because of clock desync between client and server.
- Linux 2.0 NFS didn't like talking to FreeBSD 3.x NFS.
- Solaris 7 NFS didn't like talking to 2.5.1.
Nevertheless, if you start trying to solve the problems at the application level, you will have to solve them in every application. Problem 1 is an order of magnitude more common than anything else. Better to try to solve the other bugs in the implementation (which I tried and failed to do in case 2 above). We have that freedom (but I didn't in case 3).
I never had any problems between differen Solaris releas.
Jörg
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 schilling@fokus.gmd.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix