From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27453 invoked by alias); 29 May 2005 17:40:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: Talk Amongst Yourselves Received: (qmail 27442 invoked by uid 22791); 29 May 2005 17:40:50 -0000 Received: from pop-siberian.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO pop-siberian.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (207.69.195.71) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sun, 29 May 2005 17:40:50 +0000 Received: from user-2inieqr.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.59.91] helo=efn.org) by pop-siberian.atl.sa.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #10) id 1DcRmJ-0005t1-00 for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Sun, 29 May 2005 13:40:48 -0400 Received: by efn.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 29 May 2005 10:40:49 -0700 Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 03:48:00 -0000 From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?) Message-ID: <20050529174049.GB1304@efn.org> References: <4297A14B.9070409@plausible.org> <20050527234027.GA7522@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <4297B572.9050200@plausible.org> <20050528005054.GB7522@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20050528042954.GA4196@venus> <20050528064031.GA12112@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050528064031.GA12112@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00284.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 02:40:31AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:29:54PM -0700, Edward Peschko wrote: ... > For the record: I do not give any serious consideration to the two or > three email voices here who think they speak from some sort of moral > high ground and are compelled to tell me how to communicate. I do very > much appreciate that you haven't lapsed into profanity or sarcasm, > however. > > 99% of the time when people report a problem they are saying "I have a > problem. I didn't go to too much effort to figure it out. I didn't do > any research about how I should report it. I want you to help me now." > My response to this kind of email is normally to point people to where > they need to go to either fix the problem themselves or provide the > information that we need to fix the problem. If people don't like the > way I do this, here's something that should be obvious by now: I don't > care. You can take my response or leave it. > > In this case, the OP provided a test case, which is rare (and > appreciated). They didn't provide any other details other than that, > although he did offer noise information about how he'd rather be using > linux and how this was a serious problem. He also offered a completely > uninformed guess. > > We normally ask for the guidelines from http://cygwin.com/problems.html, > to be followed, however, I know that issues of performance are rarely > cut and dry (although knowing the version of cygwin that was exhibiting > problems would have been interesting) and so the real key here is to > learn enough about the DLL to diagnose the problem. > > What you interpret as "snippiness" is just cut and dry advice: If you > have a lot of people relying on a product and the product is misbehaving > then it makes sense to either purchase support or learn enough about it > so that you can support it. Relying on volunteer email to fix something > which is impacting your whole organization is not a reliable way to get > "serious problems" fixed. > > FWIW, the original message violated many of the tenants of Eric Raymond's > "How to Ask Smart Questions" and I responded just like Eric Raymond > predicted. > > >There are two ways of seeing it - everybody (or a huge subset of everybody) > >is wrong and I'm squeaky clean, or yes I could improve my attitude in how > >to deal with people. > > One thing you may notice in my email, is that I normally try to I try to > tell people what they need to do to get results. I don't normally tell > people that "everyone" thinks a certain way and I don't often make > personal observations about people's character. I just offer (often > terse) advice on what I think someone should do to solve a problem. > > As it turns out, for the most part, the way that I conduct myself > provides me with the results that I want. The mailing list is fairly > self policing these days. People who report "cygwin not work" bugs are > directed towards the right way to report a problem and, often, their > problems are fixed. People who want to contribute are pointed at > cygwin-apps or cygwin-patches and often they end up contributing. > > Other people who want to change things but don't have a clear idea about > what they want to do and only know that they are angry because I'm not > nice to them, and won't give their half-formed thoughts the > consideration they know they deserve, eventually go away. Which is > exactly what I want to happen. > > This isn't a democracy. It's just a successful free software project. > I (and Corinna) get to make the rules and I (we) get to comport myself > how I (we) see fit. If you don't like that then you can take cygwin > source code and make your own fork. > > (And, boy will I be fuming. That should offer some incentive at least) > > >I know this cultural issue has deterred me in the past; I keep hoping that > >things'll change and I (and possibly many others) would change their mind > >and start assisting cygwin. > > I have to confess that I'm *glad* that you are deterred. IIRC, in your > communication to the cygwin list you rarely demonstrated a real grasp of > the technical issues that you were trying to grapple with. So, I'm > happy not to have to either witness or correct your misperceptions on a > regular basis. > > Oh, and, there you go again. First it was "everyone" and then it was > "possibly many others". I believe that this argument style is called > "Appeal to Belief". You've posted relatively rarely to the cygwin list > and have never, as I mentioned, and as I recall, demonstrated any > particularly strong grasp of either the technical or community aspects > of cygwin so I don't accept your premise that you speak for "everybody" > or "possibly many others". > > Not that it would matter if I did. IMO there should be a link to this message from http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#WJM. Comments?