[julian37]

RMS doesn't strike me as a very cheerful person either, at least in email conversations, so it doesn't surprise me you're getting upvoted for this remark.

That said, it doesn't surprise me either that as a person known for sticking to his principles he'd take this situation very serious.

Also, I think I see what you mean by irony but calling it that would be more appropriate if Stallman himself would have made that particular commit or even if he would have been overseeing the project actively at the time the commit was made. But neither is the case: Chong Yidong committed it according to [1], and when the commit in question was made 2009-09-28 Stefan and Yidong had already taken over the maintainer role [2].

So really, not all too ironic from where I sit... hope this isn't spoiling a good joke :-)

[1] http://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/lh/emacs/trunk/revision/97804

[2] http://emacs-fu.blogspot.com/2009/08/interview-with-chong-yi...

[rjbond3rd]

> RMS doesn't strike me as a very cheerful person either, at least in email conversations...

Actually, in person, when he's not discussing serious things, he's a very jovial, laid-back chap.

[codeup]

I agree with most of your comment.

What I meant isn't that this is funny but ironic because Emacs is the FSF/GPL flagship. That said, I fully understand that RMS is taking this seriously because he wants to sort this out. Maybe he'll make a joke about this one day if it turns out to be a harmless oversight.

[julian37]

I didn't think you were trying to make fun of the issue, but I have to admit that I replied because it bugged me a little that the topmost comment (which your GP comment is as I'm writing this) was about RMS's lack of humour.

I'm not an RMS fanboy, nor a GPL or GNU fanboy for that matter, but I do admire him for being principled and taking a stand in spite of his position becoming less and less popular in the past few years, if I detect the prevailing sentiment correctly. And I'm getting a bit tired of seeing many people taking cracks at his beard, hygiene, lack of humor, etc. instead of taking him up on the specific issues he's raising.

But again, I didn't think you were trying to do that, your lighthearted comment in a prominent position just prompted me to reply.

Cheers!

EDIT: oh, I see now, it's because of the bit about "spoiling a good joke". Sorry, I mainly added that to make it sound a bit less dry and pedantic, nothing worse than that when replying to a comment about lack of humour!