* RE: comp.lang.ada Digest, Vol 28, Issue 50 [not found] <mailman.202.1151683802.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-03 13:57 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-03 14:41 ` Licensing, again Ludovic Brenta 0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-03 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada >------------------------------ >From: "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> >Subject: Re: Ada2005 Compiler > >Carroll, Andrew wrote : >> How did all the messages about licensing issues come up on this list >> anyway? > >Because AdaCore changed the licensing of libraries to the pure GPL. > >> Is it only an issue of the libraries involved? Is there a project >> underway to make an open source compiler specifically for Ada2005 that >> does not have ties to anyone and has the correct "open source" >> licensing? > >What is "correct" open source licensing? Libraries licensed under the >GPL are "open source" all right, as per the OSI definition. Well, you seem to know more about it than I do so maybe you can tell me what the "correct" open source licensing is/should be. It sounds to me, from the posts about the licensing, is that the licensing changed and the new licensing does not meet many people's needs. Hence the question about developing a compiler that does meet the people's needs; specifically the open source community. > [snip] >See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Installing > >-- >Ludovic Brenta. >------------------------------ Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Licensing, again 2006-07-03 13:57 ` comp.lang.ada Digest, Vol 28, Issue 50 Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-03 14:41 ` Ludovic Brenta 0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Brenta @ 2006-07-03 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) Carroll, Andrew wrote : > Ludovic Brenta wrote: > >What is "correct" open source licensing? Libraries licensed under the > >GPL are "open source" all right, as per the OSI definition. > > Well, you seem to know more about it than I do so maybe you can tell me > what the "correct" open source licensing is/should be. It sounds to me, > from the posts about the licensing, is that the licensing changed and > the new licensing does not meet many people's needs. Hence the question > about developing a compiler that does meet the people's needs; > specifically the open source community. > > > > [snip] > > See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Installing Read that page. I really mean it. Have you read that page? Really? Also, see http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada-compiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this page". The recent discussion did not apply to libgnat but to the other libraries from AdaCore: AWS, ASIS-for-GNAT, GLADE, XML/Ada, and above all, GtkAda. The arguments, for or against, are the same. You also seem to have an implicit definition of "people's needs" which I think you should explain better. -- Ludovic Brenta. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.235.1151945402.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>]
* RE: Licensing, again [not found] <mailman.235.1151945402.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-03 18:31 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-04 0:18 ` M E Leypold 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik 0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-03 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada >------------------------------ >From: "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> >Subject: Licensing, again > [snip] >> > See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Installing > >Read that page. I really mean it. Have you read that page? Really? > >Also, see >http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada->co mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this >page". You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to type the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things than it would have to just answer my question. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-03 18:31 ` Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-04 0:18 ` M E Leypold 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: M E Leypold @ 2006-07-04 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw) "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > >------------------------------ > >From: "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> > >Subject: Licensing, again > > > [snip] > >> > See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Installing > > > >Read that page. I really mean it. Have you read that page? Really? > > > >Also, see > >http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada->co > mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this > >page". > > You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to type > the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things > than it would have to just answer my question. Well, that is your problem then, man. (Shaking my head). You obviously don't want an answer. Let me tell you: The Debian policy documents for choosing the compilers now and in future are exemplary (at least compared with the usual non documentation of open source stuff goes :-)). And don't expect people to "explain" something to you if you're to conceited to read some text elsewhere which explains what you want to know. After all under these circumstance one wouldn't expect you to read the explanation written in c.l.a, or would you? Regards -- Markus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-03 18:31 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-04 0:18 ` M E Leypold @ 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik 2006-07-04 15:52 ` Larry Kilgallen 2006-07-12 20:17 ` brian.b.mcguinness 1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Martin Krischik @ 2006-07-04 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Carroll, Andrew wrote: > >------------------------------ > >From: "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> > >Subject: Licensing, again > > > [snip] > >> > See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Installing > > > >Read that page. I really mean it. Have you read that page? Really? > > > >Also, see > >http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada->co > mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this > >page". > > You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to type > the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things > than it would have to just answer my question. 1st: Nobody types links. They are just copied. 2nd and more important: You are not the only one to ask theese questions. That is why most news groups have FAQs. And some of them post them every month in the vain hope that there are read. We here have - among others - http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming. Quite often I create a new article on the wiki and then post a link as answer. Because I know I will need that answer again next month - or next school term - for some other Ada beginner which will ask the same question again. Don't get me wrong: I don't mind answering. And I know that beginners often don't even know what search term they need to get the right answer. It had been the same for me. Martin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik @ 2006-07-04 15:52 ` Larry Kilgallen 2006-07-12 20:17 ` brian.b.mcguinness 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 2006-07-04 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <1151992938.363421.274110@v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, "Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> writes: > 1st: Nobody types links. They are just copied. I copy links because I am accessing my character cell newsreader from a graphics workstation. But that is not necessarily true for all. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik 2006-07-04 15:52 ` Larry Kilgallen @ 2006-07-12 20:17 ` brian.b.mcguinness 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: brian.b.mcguinness @ 2006-07-12 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Martin Krischik wrote: > > We here have - among others - > http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming. Quite often I create a > new article on the wiki and then post a link as answer. Because I know > I will need that answer again next month - or next school term - for > some other Ada beginner which will ask the same question again. I have found this wikibook to be a very useful reference, and I appreciate your work in making it available. --- Brian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.1.1152007202.1010.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>]
* Re: Licensing, again [not found] <mailman.1.1152007202.1010.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-05 18:34 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-05 19:44 ` Ludovic Brenta ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-05 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada ------------------------------ From: M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> Subject: Re: Licensing, again > Well, that is your problem then, man. (Shaking my head). You obviously > don't want an answer. Let me tell you: The Debian policy documents for > choosing the compilers now and in future are exemplary (at least > compared with the usual non documentation of open source stuff goes > :-)). > > And don't expect people to "explain" something to you if you're to > conceited to read some text elsewhere which explains what you want to > know. After all under these circumstance one wouldn't expect you to > read the explanation written in c.l.a, or would you? > > Regards -- Markus ------------------------------ So you're going to try and butt in and make it your problem because you're the ultimate authority on all matters and subjects; especially what Ludovic thinks and what I want. Talk about conceited. After all, YOU would expect me to read the explanation in c.l.a. but I do not revolve around what YOU want. Not to mention that the wiki-link was not presented as a FAQ link before I asked the question nor was it presented as an FAQ in the response to my question. For that matter Ludovic wasn't even the person to say that the wiki IS the FAQ. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-05 18:34 ` Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-05 19:44 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-05 19:47 ` Simon Wright 2006-07-06 8:32 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Brenta @ 2006-07-05 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Carroll, Andrew writes: > After all, YOU would expect me to read the explanation in c.l.a. but I > do not revolve around what YOU want. Not to mention that the wiki-link > was not presented as a FAQ link before I asked the question nor was it > presented as an FAQ in the response to my question. For that matter > Ludovic wasn't even the person to say that the wiki IS the FAQ. The reason why it is a FAQ is because we've been discussing this licensing issue to death for a couple of weeks now. Nobody here can be held responsible if you missed these threads entirely. I saw a post from you two weeks ago, where you said you were having a hard time catching up. Fine: I was nice enough not to blame you for missing the recent discussion, and instead I pointed you to full, documented answers. If now you refuse to read them, "this is your problem, man". Just like Markus said. I feel you owe us both an apology. -- Ludovic Brenta. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-05 18:34 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-05 19:44 ` Ludovic Brenta @ 2006-07-05 19:47 ` Simon Wright 2006-07-06 8:32 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Simon Wright @ 2006-07-05 19:47 UTC (permalink / raw) *plonk* ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-05 18:34 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-05 19:44 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-05 19:47 ` Simon Wright @ 2006-07-06 8:32 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: M E Leypold @ 2006-07-06 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw) "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > ------------------------------ > From: M E Leypold > <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> > Subject: Re: Licensing, again > > > Well, that is your problem then, man. (Shaking my head). You obviously > > don't want an answer. Let me tell you: The Debian policy documents for > > choosing the compilers now and in future are exemplary (at least > > compared with the usual non documentation of open source stuff goes > > :-)). > > > > And don't expect people to "explain" something to you if you're to > > conceited to read some text elsewhere which explains what you want to > > know. After all under these circumstance one wouldn't expect you to > > read the explanation written in c.l.a, or would you? > > > > Regards -- Markus > ------------------------------ > > So you're going to try and butt in and make it your problem because > you're the ultimate authority on all matters and subjects; especially Yes. :-) > what Ludovic thinks and what I want. Talk about conceited. > > After all, YOU would expect me to read the explanation in c.l.a. but I > do not revolve around what YOU want. Not to mention that the wiki-link > was not presented as a FAQ link before I asked the question nor was it > presented as an FAQ in the response to my question. For that matter > Ludovic wasn't even the person to say that the wiki IS the FAQ. Stupid flame war. Never mind, but just to further your understanding: I'm now not going back the thread to find out what happened. But my distinct impression was, that you had a question and got offered a link. Instead of reading it, you flamed the person that wanted you to help. Now even seeing this happen, pisses me off sometimes. After all this is a public forum and I can "make it my problem". From there I had three messages for you: 1) You were (in my eyes) rude and should consider this. 2) Probably you hadn't appreciated the value of the link. I found it rather valuable, you should try to read it. 3) A general lesson on communication in usenet: Usually you don't get any answers (any more) if you look as if couldn't be bothered either to do basic research before asking or (that being your case) to follow references to sources given as answers to your questions. After all, all the helpful people on usenet are not paid for helping you. I'm not surprised that you refused in a sense all three messages. I'd be sorry if this were a matter of keeping your face (by not admitting a mistake in public), perhaps the general note of my message didn't make that easy. I wish you more luck in you further inquiries. Regards -- Markus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.308.1152306302.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>]
* Re: Licensing, again [not found] <mailman.308.1152306302.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-07 22:40 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-07 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada Markus, you, nor anyone on the list is my service personnel. I offer my apologies to all of you if you think I treated you that way. I also offer my condolences if you put yourself in that position. "That's your problem man!" >From my point of view you and Ludovic were rude to me and as I explained to him, I explain to you. I don't deserve it. It will be interesting to see how far you will go to cover up your condescending attitude and tone. No matter how you sugar coat it; whether it be under the pretense of an experiment, or some story from your journal or if you hide behind an excuse like being treated like service personnel then you're still being condescending. When you offer an apology for that then you'll be ready to graduate to bigger and better things. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-07 22:40 ` Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry 2006-07-08 10:20 ` Georg Bauhaus 2006-07-08 16:30 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-12 14:19 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread From: Pascal Obry @ 2006-07-08 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Sorry Andrew but with this attitude you probably won't get any more help on this forum. That is the first time I see somebody asking for help, getting it and reacting this way just because a link as to be clicked to get the definite answer! I'm 100% in agreement with Ludovic and Markus. Good luck! Pascal. -- --|------------------------------------------------------ --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE --|------------------------------------------------------ --| http://www.obry.net --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" --| --| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry @ 2006-07-08 10:20 ` Georg Bauhaus 0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2006-07-08 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Pascal Obry wrote: > Sorry Andrew but with this attitude you probably won't get any more help > on this forum. That is the first time I see somebody asking for help, > getting it and reacting this way just because a link as to be clicked to > get the definite answer! The bare instruction "See X" can be a bit brief, all the more when the content at the end of the link X is only suitable for a short exegesis that does in the end show there are compilers that may meet peoples needs, and insofar have the "correct" license for specific uses. But summarizing this fact in the unadorned "See X" gives information far from obvious in this case! The absence of any hint to a causal connection doesn't help either, in my view. A few more words from your reusable repertoire of polite boilerplate text can help prevent the unintended consequence of an instruction being characterized as condescending. It can be condescending when the connection between question Y and answer "See X" is *not* immediately obvious in any way (I think this is the case in this thread). You're being treated as slightly stupid, or not-knowing-yet, if your mind can't unveil the implicit logical details of the connection between *general* "See X" and a *specific*, complex, and context dependent question. Compare: Would you be content with "See Ch. 3 of the RM" when someone asks a specific question about enumeration types? One very useful detail is a textual *label* attached to a pointer to a *specific* passage of text. In Ada (culture), we are told, you try to avoid being implicit and overly brief, don't you ;-) Imagine a classroom situation, someone asks, 'Why?', and the the teacher answers 'See X' invariably. That'd be a caricature of a teacher in my book, even when from some formal point of view he or she might be correct. If, at a help desk, they just gave you a thick book they may be logically correct, but they wouldn't, uh, help; what they do in fact is explain just briefly, routinely, and without straining their muscles, how this book of instructions will best answer the question, if only saying that "this book does answer your question about Y in section X." etc. Note the specifics. Maybe this is an exaggerated analogy featuring the couple Joe and Mary: MARY (in the kitchen): Joe? Do you know where Y is? JOE (in the dinging room): Yes. Somewhere in the house. MARY (rushing towards the dinging room, angry): _____ Joe may be correct, but he could easily have done better. Fill in the blanks, or change Joe's answer. :-) -- Georg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-07 22:40 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry @ 2006-07-08 16:30 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-12 14:19 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Ludovic Brenta @ 2006-07-08 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > Markus, you, nor anyone on the list is my service personnel. I offer my > apologies to all of you if you think I treated you that way. I also > offer my condolences if you put yourself in that position. "That's your > problem man!" > >>From my point of view you and Ludovic were rude to me and as I explained > to him, I explain to you. I don't deserve it. > > It will be interesting to see how far you will go to cover up your > condescending attitude and tone. No matter how you sugar coat it; > whether it be under the pretense of an experiment, or some story from > your journal or if you hide behind an excuse like being treated like > service personnel then you're still being condescending. > > When you offer an apology for that then you'll be ready to graduate to > bigger and better things. OK, I apologise for being rude to you in my *second* post, which I should not have written. I was angry and frustrated that you dismissed the useful, complete and detailed answers I pointed you to in my *first* post by calling that "a little wiki-link". Several people have put in a lot of effort to write that "little wiki" and it is just not right of you to ignore that and refuse to follow the links. -- Ludovic Brenta. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-07 22:40 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry 2006-07-08 16:30 ` Ludovic Brenta @ 2006-07-12 14:19 ` M E Leypold 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: M E Leypold @ 2006-07-12 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw) First and foremost my apologies to all: This is really OT. Still I think I don't want to let this thread stand in public as if Andrew had scared me away :-). Hi Andrew, "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > From my point of view you and Ludovic were rude to me and as I > explained to him, I explain to you. I don't deserve it. I've been going back to your post on which I then "butted in" as you said, and found > >Also, see > >http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada->co > mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this > >page". > You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to type > the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things > than it would have to just answer my question. I, personally, think you just overstepped the line there and deserved my answer to that. I won't pretend you were "rude". My message to you was essentially about wether you really think that attitude will help you to get more answers in future. Since you refused advice and really started to throw around accusations (a rather childish reaction in my opinion), I do not think I could help you there. As I said, I'm still working on the right code to get that message across to some kinds of usenet posters. > When you offer an apology for that then you'll be ready to graduate to > bigger and better things. Overall I think you take all this much too serious. This is not a game of a sort you have to win by forcing others to apologize to you. Furthermore if it were so, your moves would be extraordinarily inept. Allow me to demonstrate: <demonstration> > It will be interesting to see how far you will go to cover up your > condescending attitude and tone. No matter how you sugar coat it; > whether it be under the pretense of an experiment, or some story from > your journal or if you hide behind an excuse like being treated like > service personnel then you're still being condescending. Yes, I'm condescending. So what? </demonstration> My suggestion would be, that you calm down and we just forget that episode. Note that I have not insisted on an apology from you and still don't, also to make it possible to you just to forget this whole thing. Everyone can slip up now and then :-) (so can I, I'm no angel myself). I'm sure that after a number of reasonable posts nobody will remember all this and I'm confident that most will still read you posts and answer your questions. I personally will welcome your contributions to c.l.a. If on the other side you still think you have an issue with me, I'm willing to discuss it, but I suggest you write me by personal e-mail and spare c.l.a. Regards -- Markus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.381.1152735602.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>]
* Re: Licensing, again [not found] <mailman.381.1152735602.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-12 22:27 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-14 8:39 ` M E Leypold 0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-12 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada >>>Also, see >>>http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada-> co >>>mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see this >>>page". > >> You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to type >> the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things >> than it would have to just answer my question. > >I, personally, think you just overstepped the line there and deserved >my answer to that. I was just giving back the same attitude that I got. I don't see an apology from him to c.l.a. so I guess being rude is common here and NO ONE has to apologize. We can all just be rude to each other eh? > >Yes, I'm condescending. So what? > It means that your research on "the right code" is a figment of your attitude and not based on any fact. It shows that you are willing to continue this discussion for your own personal satisfaction and your intent is to mock people. Is that why you are on c.l.a? So you can give people "the right code" and mock them? Please, don't answer that, you'll be wasting all our time. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-12 22:27 ` Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-14 8:39 ` M E Leypold 2006-07-14 21:10 ` Simon Wright 0 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread From: M E Leypold @ 2006-07-14 8:39 UTC (permalink / raw) "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > >>>Also, see > >>>http://www.ada-france.org/debian/debian-ada-policy.html#How-the-Ada-> > co > >>>mpiler-for-Etch-was-chosen again, I really mean it when I say "see > this > >>>page". > > > >> You can keep your little wiki-link. It took you more characters to > type > >> the links and all that elementary babble about really reading things > >> than it would have to just answer my question. > > > >I, personally, think you just overstepped the line there and deserved > >my answer to that. > I was just giving back the same attitude that I got. I don't see an > apology from him to c.l.a. so I guess being rude is common here and NO > ONE has to apologize. We can all just be rude to each other eh? > > > > >Yes, I'm condescending. So what? > > > It means that your research on "the right code" is a figment of your > attitude and not based on any fact. > > It shows that you are willing to continue this discussion for your own > personal satisfaction and your intent is to mock people. Is that why > you are on c.l.a? So you can give people "the right code" and mock > them? > > Please, don't answer that, you'll be wasting all our time. Dearest Andrew, Don't be so modest. You _deserve_ an answer, even if it costs me _my valuable_ time. I freely admit to being an idiot for ever having taken that up, and taking it up again doesn't make it better: Obviously some insights don't come easier to the recipient if at all when force fed to him. As my last answer before signing off from this thread forever, let me just quote the the part of my mail you so conveniently snipped away: | Overall I think you take all this much too serious. <...> | My suggestion would be, that you calm down and we just forget that | episode. <...> | If on the other side you still think you have an issue with me, I'm | willing to discuss it, but I suggest you write me by personal e-mail | and spare c.l.a. I think that (and your answer to that) says enough. In the meantime I've come to see even the entertainment value of this thread as rather low. As a sparring partner you're sadly lacking in style and are indeed far from being a master of witful repartee. So it's really time to quit now. Still amused -- Markus PS: You were also writing: > I was just giving back the same attitude that I got. I don't > see an apology from him to c.l.a. so I guess being rude is > common here (...) From the context I conclude the "him" must be meaning Ludovic. I note, and would like to point out to you that Ludovic actually apologized to you (a thing I'd never have done in that case). Perhaps you should (apart from learning how to ask questions) also learn how to read usenet. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing, again 2006-07-14 8:39 ` M E Leypold @ 2006-07-14 21:10 ` Simon Wright 0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Simon Wright @ 2006-07-14 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw) M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes: > "Carroll, Andrew" <andrew.carroll@okstate.edu> writes: > You were also writing: > > > I was just giving back the same attitude that I got. I don't > > see an apology from him to c.l.a. so I guess being rude is > > common here (...) > > From the context I conclude the "him" must be meaning Ludovic. I > note, and would like to point out to you that Ludovic actually > apologized to you (a thing I'd never have done in that > case). Perhaps you should (apart from learning how to ask > questions) also learn how to read usenet. I've stopped reading Mr Carroll's postings, but from what I remember his newsreader doesn't do threading. So it's a case of needing to find the right tool for the job. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.3.1152871202.26624.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>]
* Re: Licensing, again [not found] <mailman.3.1152871202.26624.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> @ 2006-07-16 21:34 ` Carroll, Andrew 0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Carroll, Andrew @ 2006-07-16 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada Markus, You can try to sign off this thread but of course you won't because winning the conversation is of more importance to you than actually taking the time to get to a resolution. That's probably why your attempts at "the right code" never work; because YOU miss the point not them. Case in point: This wasn't your thread in the first place. Stop trying to be the hero. It's best to just leave it alone; which is what I've been trying to tell you for quite some time now. Besides, just trying to win the conversation shows how much you LACK insight, not how much you provide it. Case 2 in point: You said "Don't be so modest. You _deserve_ an answer, even if it costs me_my valuable_ time." You'd trade valuable time just to save face? That doesn't sound like a hero. >I freely admit to being an idiot for ever having taken that up, and >taking it up again doesn't make it better: Obviously some insights >don't come easier to the recipient if at all when force fed to him. Insights? Don't flatter yourself. I'm sure if you shut your mouth and listen more you would make some progress and actually come up with something insightful. It's okay little buddy, keep trying, you'll get it some day. Regardless, I'm glad you are giving in. Good luck to you, you'll need it! Now on to bigger and better things. Ludovic wrote: >OK, I apologise for being rude to you in my *second* post, which I >should not have written. I was angry and frustrated that you >dismissed the useful, complete and detailed answers I pointed you to >in my *first* post by calling that "a little wiki-link". Several >people have put in a lot of effort to write that "little wiki" and it >is just not right of you to ignore that and refuse to follow the >links. Your information in the 3 July 2006 posting was understood and a great answer. I did not mean to imply that the wiki is useless. I think George's post on July 8th better explains my feelings than anything. I read the link when you posted it, the second time and it wasn't the wiki or the link but the way you came across. I apologize for my rude response and implying that the wiki was useless. In my work I am required to explain things, not just provide a link and as such I had the expectation that I would get something other than a link back. My oversight is that c.l.a. is not my work place and I cannot expect the same things; even if they are explicitly stated. Unfortunately, Ludovic, with respect to our interaction / relationship, other people piped in when they really shouldn't have. Lastly I apologize to everyone on the list (other than Markus, of course) that I've drawn this out and also for implying the wiki was worthless. This will be my last post on this thread, regardless of what everyone replies. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-07-16 21:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <mailman.202.1151683802.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-03 13:57 ` comp.lang.ada Digest, Vol 28, Issue 50 Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-03 14:41 ` Licensing, again Ludovic Brenta [not found] <mailman.235.1151945402.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-03 18:31 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-04 0:18 ` M E Leypold 2006-07-04 6:02 ` Martin Krischik 2006-07-04 15:52 ` Larry Kilgallen 2006-07-12 20:17 ` brian.b.mcguinness [not found] <mailman.1.1152007202.1010.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-05 18:34 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-05 19:44 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-05 19:47 ` Simon Wright 2006-07-06 8:32 ` M E Leypold [not found] <mailman.308.1152306302.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-07 22:40 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-08 7:32 ` Pascal Obry 2006-07-08 10:20 ` Georg Bauhaus 2006-07-08 16:30 ` Ludovic Brenta 2006-07-12 14:19 ` M E Leypold [not found] <mailman.381.1152735602.13640.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-12 22:27 ` Carroll, Andrew 2006-07-14 8:39 ` M E Leypold 2006-07-14 21:10 ` Simon Wright [not found] <mailman.3.1152871202.26624.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> 2006-07-16 21:34 ` Carroll, Andrew
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox