This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-xfree
mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.
Re: compiling flpsed under Cygwin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Pechtchanski" <pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu>
To: <cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:21 AM
Subject: Re: compiling flpsed under Cygwin
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Stephen P. Harris wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@XXXXXX.XXX>
To: <cygwin-xfree@XXXXXX.XXX>
<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>.
[snip]
SH: So change the FAQ and the name of the mailing list. Why is
your sayso tobe considered authoritative and the FAQ dismissed?
[snip]
1) You display either ignorance of the FAQ or presume that others
should regard your interpretation of the FAQ as superior to that doc.
See <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#CGF>.
I suppose this is an appeal to authority type of argument. I criticized
the fact that the Cygwin FAQ and CGF's statements contradict
each other. Do you think mentioning his title erases the contradiction?
It was Chris Faylor who wrote:
"1. If you are truly using XFree86 then you're off-topic for this mailing
list. We don't support XFree86 anymore.
SH: That may be, but how am I to know that? The FAQ says:
"Almost anything related to Cygwin is on-topic here. Please note,
that this is not a mailing list for the discussion of general Windows
topics. There are many many other places for that on the Internet.
Also note, that if you are interested in the Cygwin XFree86 project
which is porting the XFree86 code to Windows, then the correct
mailing list for this discussion is cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com. "
SH: I assume then that the FAQ does not need to be amended and
that Chris Faylor can contradict the FAQ whenever he chooses.
SH: Igor, bring up titles does not refute evidence of a written
contradiction in policy. Your point about qualifications does
nothing to rebut my point that the policies are contradictory.
Do you think you make the point that such contradictions are
ok, depending on who makes them? You are replying to an
imaginary issue, his qualifications, rather than my point which
is that the statements are contradictory. And so on. I do think
CFG should not make statements contradictory to the FAQ,
or assume the responsibility of editing the FAQ so that it does
not mislead users; not when you push reading the documentation.
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA