Please stop spamming this list with Microsoft related messages

[Christopher Browne]

On 3/25/06, Dominic Bonfiglio <dominicbonfiglio-Mmb7MZpHnFY at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Christopher Browne wrote:
> >  There is, of course, another rather more inclusive definition of
> > Linux.  This is that of the notion of "Linux distributions," which
> > consist of the Linux kernel as well as a boatload of other software,
> > of widely varying interest, under widely varying licenses.  In order
> > to distinguish FreeBSD from Linux, we really need to head back to the
> > "strict constructivist" definition, where Linux is the kernel, not the
> > assembly of parts under other names/licenses.
> >
> > Unfortunately, once you head down the road of being interested in,
> > say, OpenOffice.org, it is very easy for anything *forcibly*
> > identifiable with Linux to be forgotten.
> >
> nice post. i know that most of my questions for TLUG  have had to do
> with distros and open source software configurations, which strictly
> speaking, as Christopher points out, have nothing to do with the linux
> kernel. do other subscribers think that such questions are inappropriate
> for this list? if so, i am happy to direct such questions elsewhere and
> would be grateful for good alternative lists and forums.

Well there are commonly mailing lists specific to one piece of
software or another.  I'm active in the PostgreSQL community; there
are *very* active and useful mailing lists there, and if people have
relevant questions, I'd certainly point them in that direction.

But I think you're missing the point a little.

I don't think the "strict constructionist" argument (where Linux ==
"kernel") is either what GTALUG is about or that it would work to so
narrowly focus the spectrum of what is acceptable on the list.  I
don't have a good "strict" answer as to what is appropriate.

The trouble is that I'm not sure there is a good "strict" answer.  I
think that implies that the "roads to take" will long be an ambiguous
matter.  We'll periodically have folks like Leah and Colin
legitimately griping when people *clearly* step too far away from the
road...

"What should we do in response to what's up with MSFT Vista?" is a
legitimate enough question.  Alas, it is tempting people to simply get
into dung-flinging fights.

To *my* mind, the answer is: Nothing.  It sorta looks like a probable failure.

If you think you need to do something, then some answers that seem
relevant are things like the following

- Try out GNOME search-related projects like Beagle, Dashboard, Storage
- Try KDE Kat, Tenor or such (KDE equivalents)
- See what's up with KDE Plasma (intended to be kinda akin to Apple Aqua)
- See what's up with GNOME and KDE equivalents to Apple Rendezvous
(which is a way for hosts to do start-with-zero-knowledge
auto-discovery of local network services)
- Find ways to use dbus

Sending in a meaningful bug report on any of these sorts of things is
what will make them usable, and that seems to me to be the most
effective "nail" to put in Vista's coffin.  Mind you, none of this is
"strict constructivist Linux kernel" stuff :-).

Nobody has said word one on this list about these sorts of things, and
they're the "neat new stuff" that people are working on that are, in
at least some cases, what Microsoft is cloning to get parts of Vista.
--
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linux.html
"The true  measure of a  man is how he treats  someone who can  do him
absolutely no good." -- Samuel Johnson, lexicographer (1709-1784)
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml