shameful censoring of mono opposition
erratic at devel.ws
Tue Jun 9 03:11:13 UTC 2009
I sorry, just wanted to be a part of the lols
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Remco <remco47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Derek Broughton<derek at pointerstop.ca>
> > Remco wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:50 AM, Derek Broughton<derek at pointerstop.ca>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Remco wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:52 PM, David
> >>>> Schlesinger<David.Schlesinger at access-company.com> wrote:
> >>>>> As Derek pointed out, Wine is indeed in the universal repository. You
> >>>>> were completely mistaken about it, rendering your argument
> >>>>> The appropriate response at that point is to say, "I was wrong", not
> >>>>> try to switch to a completely different argument in mid-stream.
> >>>>> Nobody's come within a parsec of suggesting that the codecs you
> >>>>> should be part of the default install.
> >>>> I guess you're really not getting my point. I was actually trying to
> >>>> let you work that one out by comparing it to the codecs.
> >>> That's not an argument, it's a complete misdirection. The
> >>> non-free Codecs _aren't_ in Ubuntu repositories, Wine is.
> >> You're arguing semantics. I don't care about semantics.
> > Sorry, but no. You are pretending to have a rational discussion, while
> > dismissing perfectly valid arguments.
> What's your argument against my position? That I maybe made a semantic
> cock-up in a throwaway comparison? That's a great one... How does that
> relate to Mono?
> >> The codecs are
> >> not-in-Ubuntu the same way as Wine, because they are not installed,
> > No, they are not. The codecs are NOT in Ubuntu at all. Show me where
> > exist in the repositories. Wine is in the repos.
> If the codecs are not in the repos, then I'm amazed as to how they got
> onto my system. Clearly, the ffmpeg project (yeah, universe) doesn't
> exist. Besides, how is the exact location of the codecs relevant? I
> can install them in the same way as I install Wine.
> >> Wine isn't installed because
> >> Mark Shuttleworth doesn't want Ubuntu to be cheap Windows:
> >> http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/11/1220219
> >> http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/05/1546230
> > Excuse me, but when did slashdot become an authoritative source of
> > of the workings of Mark Shuttleworth's mind (or of anything else, for
> > matter). In any case, the first of those simply says Wine won't be
> > preinstalled on Dell minis, and the second is even more vague - it says
> > Shuttleworth isn't staking the future of Ubuntu on Wine. Neither one
> > that Ubuntu will ever _not_ include Wine.
> Slashdot is not the source. Look one click further and you'll find the
> actual source. You just fell in the same trap as the Wikipedia
> naysayers. It's just easy reference. And if you don't want to see this
> as the motivation for not including Wine, then so be it. I think it's
> pretty clear why Wine is not supposed to be on the default install.
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
Paige Adele Thompson
E-mail/GTalk: erratic at devel.ws
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss