Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <4040DDED.8050709@tlinx.org> Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:29:01 -0800 From: linda w User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: [Fwd: Bug: Perl:IsWinNT undefined & RFE, only use "/" in reg values, not names..?] References: <40350E21 DOT 9010204 AT tlinx DOT org> <20040219232312 DOT GD23994 AT redhat DOT com> In-Reply-To: <20040219232312.GD23994@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes The same problem keeps coming up in new and different ways that keep running into. My background also has user interface design, usability in it and I keep running into problems as I try to use things from the perspective of a user like my mom -- or just a windows users not famililar with linux -- trying to use open source tools on the windows platform. I keep running into usability problems because of the apparent need for any user to be a full fledged developer to debug and user so many aspects of the cygwin toolset. Go read "http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html". It's an article by Eric Raymon on why software projects fail to deliver -- all the time maintaining their air of technical superiority. From as near as I can tell, so many programmers, especially young ones, look in contempt and people who don't share their knowledge. When people try to use tools and envionrments in a way that is natural to them and it tails, instead of listening, you have those who have threatened your list membership over things they consider to be off-topic because they are living stories about fighting for what is 'right' in SW and losing to the almight $$. My last manager and the last open source group I worked with was far more concerned about keeping things complex than reworking the system to do it right and make it simple. If it's kept complex, there is job security. But that's not great for average user who finds they have to be a developer expert to use so many pieces of software -- so much so, that even switching from 1 interface like WORD to an open source equiv is something met with alot of food dragging, fear and protests. So rather than developing a new and yet another incompatible toolset, I want something that allows union and merger -- transparancy and easy. The original Cygwin charter -- to allow use of free SW tools transparently in Cyg or Win envinronments. Instead all I get is resistance and excuses that ultimately boil down to ego gratification of creating a new interface that everyone has to learn that doesn't help a wide range audidience but only a narrow set of developers. Ego's about who controls what always seem to get in the way of doing "the right thing"...it always seems to boil down to another example of the "dominator" model -- one side wins and there has to be a loser, vs. a cooperative model where everyone wins. It was a big sticking point between me and my last boss, who called me "Little Linda, bubble of good" in "Casey's evil plan for world domination". I was constantly considered naive for wanting plans where boths sides one -- and in joking, all humor aside, I'd often be asked, where's the fun in doing it if there isn't a loser to gloat over? Where's the fun of doing things right if you would miss someone like me ignorantly running into different variations of incompatibility on a regular basis and get to see 'how stupid' I am by hoping for change? Open source falls short, greatly, in areas of user-friendlyness, and user interface. What matters is the code and the leading edge programming -- the UI is "fluff" and if you (the user) don't like it, go start your own project or branch -- good luck with trying to spend all your time just merging current functionality to keep your branch current. My focus is _usability_. But, obviously, the concept of seeing my problems with non-usability are so amusing that keeping the status quo is useful just because it's fun to watch someone bang their head against another side of the same wall -- everything requires specialized knowledge and requires a new way to learn everything. I still haven't figured out how to get Tk to build from cpan w/o the "x" param. It builds when I drop into the build dir "view Tk" from in cpan, and build it w/the "x", but to install, I finally just ignore the makefile which seems to have the target: install: all pure_install pure_doc_install. The "all" goes off and starts building things again -- if I just do a make install, it goes off and starts compiling things even though, supposedly it's already been built. What is lost by allowing perl to make libwin32 calls, in this case, is not violating the principle of "least surprise". A basic design principle as far back as I remember. I'm not acting "as if" anything. I'm "real", since the problems I come up with are because I try "real things". I don't just sit around and think of ways to run into pre-existing barriers. Your comment is inaccurate, but indicative of your own projections -- If I know myself and know what I bring to a discussion, then things the other person accuses me of that I know I am not bringing to the table, I know projections of what they would do -- since people project onto others their own ideas of how the world works based on how they work in the world. Sorry for the long lines, occasionally -- but Thunderbird likes to default to proportional fonts and has no reformat ability -- so once one has typed in an email in proportional font, it isn't automatically easy to switch to Courier and reformat the lines -- it doesn't have basic features that vim has :-(. The bottom line is that perl on cygwin is also a perl running on top of NT. It should merge functionality of both. I see no logical technical reason why it shouldn't return "WinNT" as defined or not based on the underlying OS. I don't want to use ASP perl -- they went off in another direction from standard perl with their own package manager and they adopted the bill gates "let's use '\'" mentality that seemed to be born out of a desire to be different than unix -- something that proved the retardedness of that mentality, since "\" is something as a literlizing character in all of the common languages these days making it a rather dumb choice for a FS component separator. It used to work -- builtin to the OS, I don't know why they don't move towards "/" as a standard -- it would help unify source bases, but Gates doesn't want that -- he wants "lockin" program written for NT only working on NT. He desires incompatibility -- like any good capitalist desiring to control their customers. Plblblbl. I happy you find a source of regular, "new" problems entertaining. Unlike you might be doing, though if the circumstances were reversed, I'm not actin. I really am the way I seem. My brain doesn't work the way most people's do due to some aspects of Attention Regulation Deficit Disorder ARDD. I.e. My attention goes off in different directions because I see different details than the majority see. Sometimes that means I'm seeing with a microscope where others are looking at it through normal glasses while at other times I'm looking with a telescope or wide angle lens. I quite literally see things differently from many others -- sometimes seeing things that others don't see, other times missing things that others do see. But just because I see differently doesn't mean it's "wrong". It's just different. Linda Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 11:27:29AM -0800, linda w wrote: > >What is lost by allowing Perl to make libwin32 calls. > > > >What is lost is the delightful opportunity of having you bring this up, >gripe about it, and act as if it was a new topic on a monthly basis. > >I doubt that there is anyone in the cygwin mailing list who would want >to lose the opportunity of seeing you rehash this subject over and over >and over again. > > -- In the marketplace of "Real goods", capitalism is limited by safety regulations, consumer protection laws, and product liability. In the computer industry, what protects the consumer? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/