Re: Mozilla. Re: Netscape Support for XSL - client vs server rant

Subject: Re: Mozilla. Re: Netscape Support for XSL - client vs server rant
From: Keith Visco <kvisco@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 14:53:23 -0700

Paul Tchistopolskii wrote:
> 
> > and was left with no real library of base classes I could rely on.
> 
> If you have not tried STLport - that was your and only your descision to
> reinvent the wheel.

I'm not complaining about having to reinvent the wheel, I apparently
didn't make my argument clear. So I apologize for doing a bad job at
expressing my thoughts...and no, i've never used STLport, nor do I have
the desire to do so. 

> 
> > These people (the developers) won't get paid, they won't get any fame
> 
> Some are paid 

No...not one is paid...I was referring to the people working on the XSLT
module....which is the module in question...this is the XSLT list right?
And the initial posting was complaining about the [lack] of XSLT
support.


> and some get quite a bit  of fame only because they are
> participating in something called 'free software'.  Some are not only payed,
> but also get a lot of fame.

I fail to see anyone who is working on the XSLT module getting paid or
any 'fame'. But that's also not very important. The point I was trying
to make was that the initial posting was complaining about the
[tardiness] in supporting the latest standards and recommendations, and
in particular XSLT. The people working to support the XSLT spec in
Mozilla are working on nights and weekends, and whenever they can to do
just that....support XSLT, and I think complaining about how quickly
they are working is foolish. If you think they are too slow...then do
something about it...help out. *YOU* have the perfect opportunity to
help.

> There are many different kinds and reasons
> why people are participating in 'free' software.

Absolutely...the are many many reasons...and recognition and money are
certainly part of them. And probably a good motivation for many Mozilla
developers...but I am not talking about Mozilla as a whole...I am just
referring to the XSLT module...and since I know everyone who is
contributing to that module, I can tell you the motivation is simply to
get a working XSLT processor inside of Mozilla. Nothing more, nothing
less.

> 
> I see. So now there are some brand new holy cows over there, called 'free'
> software. ( To me - software is either good, or bad. No matter is it 'free'
> or 'not' ).

Great...you have two categories for software: Good and Bad. What does
this have to do with my argument?  Label it bad or good if you wish.
Label it red, green, or blue. Why should I care?

What bothered me is not labeling software bad or good. It's when you
blame people, who are (regardless of _your_ assumptions) working hard on
a project, for not working hard enough. 

> 
> Somehow you are participating in some marketing-driven attempt to
> re-animate some heap of code produced by fulltime developers
> who have left some company long time ago.  This is your and only
> your descision.
> 

Paul...you are totally off the mark. The XSLT module was not part of
Netscape Navigator. I am not trying to re-animate anything. You really
aren't making much sense (at least to me) at all.

> I don't understand why now nobody can even *touch*  that monster.

What are you talking about? This makes no sense (to me).

> 
> Nobody is critisizing you. The statement was:
> 
> Heather Lindsay wrote:
> > The only ones you can blame are microsoft and mazilla for not being able to
> > keep up with technology that changes every day (are we asking for too much?).
> 
> Excuse me - what is wrong  with this statement?

I already told you...feel free to re-read my posting, and if I haven't
presented my arguments clear enough then I apologize, but I don't know
how else to express it. 

--Keith


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread