It is "disingeuous" to suggest I use binary packages or that I use third party software whose source that I have not edited or read.
As it happens, I am constantly reading the sources of the software I use: kernel, userland and third party. And I do pay attention to attributed authorship on that software.
But I am not evaulating any software based on "personalities" of its authors, as alleged by random people, often anonymous, in internet mailing lists, forums, blogs, etc.
I am going to continue to use the "best software available", as determined by me, for better or worse. I think I am not alone in that approach and I think it is reasonable. I will not be distracted by petty criticisms of what I know to be good software or "dirty laundry" about the authors on the internet that I may encounter in the process.
I'm calling bullshit on injecting an absurd dichotomy between choosing software based on the author's personality versus "reading every single line of code of the software running on your system". It is possible to choose software based on qualities inherent in the software and not know or care about the personality or personal matters of the author. And it is possible to do this without "reading every single line of code of the software running on your system".
Those qualities of the software and its design, what I call "software aesthetics" might include, among other things, the size of the program, its resource requirements, dependencies, configuration, and even, yes, the source code itself. Nowhere did I suggest that I read "every line" of every source code file comprising the operating system I use.
Where possible I do selectively read and sometimes edit some of these files. With respect to third party software, I often do read every file. I prefer software that is small enough where I can do this. But what does the idea of reading "every line of code" in an (operating) system have to do with my original comment? Nothing.
In any event, since you have shifted the discussion to (operating) systems, I can confirm I did not choose the (operating) system I use based on the "personality" of its authors. I chose it because of the "software aesthetics" reflected in the software itself. As I see it, this might include an appreciation for the command line and small program size, manual configuration by the user and having all options off by default, documentation, portability and "clean code", among other things. People making comments in email or on the www on whether they like or dislike the authors of this software did not affect my decision to use it.
The point of my original comment was simple: someone may choose software based on the software itself, not the author's personality, whatever that may be. I thought this is worth considering in response to the parent comment that "Personality is important". But others may disagree.
I would like to end this exchange now. I appreciate your input.
As it happens, I am constantly reading the sources of the software I use: kernel, userland and third party. And I do pay attention to attributed authorship on that software.
But I am not evaulating any software based on "personalities" of its authors, as alleged by random people, often anonymous, in internet mailing lists, forums, blogs, etc.
I am going to continue to use the "best software available", as determined by me, for better or worse. I think I am not alone in that approach and I think it is reasonable. I will not be distracted by petty criticisms of what I know to be good software or "dirty laundry" about the authors on the internet that I may encounter in the process.