george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Fri Aug 26 02:30:07 EDT 2005
Yeap, that was offending. I did post an answer to c.l.r
Due to the newsgroup-list bridge problems, this got somewhat lost.
Perhaps it is better that way, flame wars are not really needed. But
then again, posts like this
(http://www.livejournal.com/users/djberg96/40192.html) are not needed
On 8/26/05, James Britt <james_b at neurogami.com> wrote:
> Mark Probert wrote:
> > The debate in c.l.r is about overriding standard class methods and
> > behaviour. Extending is okay, IMO, modifying is another issue.
> > In George's defence, I think that he took the code from someone else.
> > Given the gift he has given us with Nitro and Og, this is a small price
> > to pay ;-)
> On something of a side note, did anyone else find that thread weird? I
> can understand wanting to point out design or code flaws, and having a
> public discussion on differing opinions, but it seems perversely nasty
> to take free code, and, because it gave you a problem that the author
> almost certainly did not intend, publicly identify the code author and
> essentially rip him a new asshole.
> There are any number of ways to address such issues with a bit of tact,
> while still having a public discussion that doesn't point to a
> particular offender.
> http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
> http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
> http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
> http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
More information about the Nitro-general