[horde] [imp] default reply behavior in dimp/imp

[Ralf Lang]

Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 03:16:48 schrieb Craig White:
> On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 06:28 -0300, D G Teed wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> 
wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 17:01 -0300, D G Teed wrote:
> > > 
> > > Let me give it to you simply enough so you might possibly understand...
> > > You have the full source code. If there's something that doesn't work
> > > how you want, you can change it yourself. That is the entire point of
> > > open source software.
> > 
> > That is the often repeated mantra of open source software.  However
> > is it maintainable?
> 
> ----
> of course it's maintainable... that's done widely. I do it for many open
> source projects and the only reason you are suggesting otherwise is that
> you have zero software skills and simply are content to leach and bitch
> when it doesn't do exactly what you want.

Let's tone down a bit, ok?

Yes, maintaining downstream patches is work. It's not hard work but it costs 
time and adds maintainence overhead. The version of horde3 which shipped with 
suse linux around 2006 (?) had several kolab related patches and other stuff 
added. These patches would be applied half-automatically by the rpm building 
process. It's maintainable as long as you don't create your own little 
patching kingdom.

> 
> Basically all software is written and then revised and the differences
> would likely be separated into a patch. Thus utilities such as 'diff'
> and 'patch' are core to software development (or various counterparts
> depending upon the middleware environment). It's common practice to
> create modifications and thus create a diff/patch file.

And it's common practice to either offer them upstream (not an option in this 
case) or share patches and hooks to the public to have collaboration and peer 
review for these modifications.
 
> All of that said, I'm rather surprised that you would so blatantly
> expose yourself to offering absolutely no value to open source
> implementation whatsoever. If you can only follow installation
> instructions, you are nothing better than a monkey with a keyboard. 

Well, there's nothing wrong with users and admins actually reading and 
following instructions. I wish they did it all the time. Still, my point is: 
there's nothing wrong with just being a user or just giving feedback and no 
patches.

I don't like the way this thread went. Sure, some companies are known for 
their employees to forget bleeding edge prototype phones in a bar or a public 
toilets. It hasn't exactly ruined that particular company. The same is true 
for email. Sometimes, people send email to the wrong recipients. Sometimes, 
recipients leak email. Most times, it's not all too critical. Still, Michael 
and the others are seriously thinking about improvements.

> If
> we dismiss the acquisition cost of proprietary software, the biggest
> difference between proprietary software and open source is that you can
> actually modify open source software in any way you want while you have
> to swallow proprietary software hook, line & sinker... it's almost
> always binary so you can't change a thing.
> ----
free != open. But let's not open that can.

> > Go ahead and damage lives out of ignorance.  I won't.
> 
> ----
> you have many options... don't use it or disable DIMP. Patch it - it is
> open source after all.
> 
> It's probably not reasonable to expect everyone to equate 'reply all' to
> damaging people's lives -

I'm curious. Whose life got damaged by Horde? 

-- 
Ralf Lang
Linux Consultant / Developer

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537