This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [patch,committed] Make Fortran maintainers "Non-Autopoiesis Maintainers"
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
- To: Tobias Schlüter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>
- Cc: Brooks Moses <brooks dot moses at codesourcery dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:40:49 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch,committed] Make Fortran maintainers "Non-Autopoiesis Maintainers"
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent: mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to: x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=lT1pcZnvcLimL/E2q+jxHK7nZPyK60BP5lcEfjzloOz4hvWZZrJthZX04eAlm0ZV1 lucNPL9qRwnfnHhesGWaw==
- Organization: Google Canada
- References: <C56978E2-9F81-4D54-9E95-4432E40B9E91@gmail.com> <46720C06.2010008@codesourcery.com> <4672E903.3010202@physik.uni-muenchen.de>
On 6/15/07 3:31 PM, Tobias Schlüter wrote:
> follow-up, and I'm fine with that. OTOH I do object (with a smiley) to
> being labeled something that -- even though I can understand its meaning
> from the ancient greek I studied -- I haven't the slightest idea how to
> pronounce (sorry, "autopoiesis" is not in the dictionaries that I
> checked). I think "non-autonomous" would do the job perfectly well,
> without putting community members who didn't study philosophy into the
> dark.
I agree with this. I also found the term very puzzling and very hard to
understand, even after having read its definition.