> The developer of the man-db, Colin Watson, decided that there was enough fun and the story won't get forgotten and removed the easter egg completely.
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/man-db.git/commit/?id=b225...
> The developer of the man-db, Colin Watson, decided that there was enough fun and the story won't get forgotten and removed the easter egg completely.
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/man-db.git/commit/?id=b225...
I'm all for easter eggs (and haven't added one in forever, maybe unit test test strings), but they shouldn't interfere with regular operation. This particular one could've been updated to only trigger for a certain command, for example.
I thought the easter egg only occurs when man is called without arguments.
What obligation does a developer/maintainer have in this situation? If the hospital is using free/open source code, it's on them to understand how it works and how to fix it.
It’s just a difference in personality. Claiming that liking Easter eggs is the essence of humanity is a pretty extreme exaggeration.
Claiming that the parent claimed that easter eggs are "the essence of humanity" is an extreme exaggeration.
(lol, this is not a mission critical, internet connected system)