Re: Bidi-less Applications Patching Policy

[Muhammad Alkarouri <malkarouri at yahoo dot co dot uk>]

 --- Mohammed Elzubeir <elzubeir at arabeyes dot org> wrote:
> Then, you have cases like PuTTY where it was more than just a license
> issue.. it was a matter of policy to not used shared libraries. What do
> we do here? We really had no choice.

In PuTTY it was a matter of policy == a matter of personal liking. A fork of
PuTTY with bidi support is almost as good (as bad) as a replacement of existing
BiDi implementation. Why don't Arabeyes people feel they are respectable enough
to have a policy not changed whenever someone outside 'has a policy'?

> I agree -- but what about the instances where it's not an option?

Due to policy issues or technically?

> > That's the root of our disagreement ;).
> 
> That's a personal preference -- has nothing to do with
> Arabeyes/*bidi/etc.

If reasons are due to 'policy' issues, then personal preferences have
everything to do with it. It was a personal preference to join Arabeyes, not a
business venture.

Salam,
Muhammad Alkarouri


	
	
		
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html