Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Thomas Mellman]

Lisi <lists@shemeshdirectory.co.il> schrieb am 30.09.02 13:30:49:
> OK, let me clarify - I guess what I would really like is a Cygwin-specific 
> *Unix* beginner's list. My desire is not to get rid of stupid questions, 
> since I think all my questions are probably stupid, but rather the 
> questions that are just over my head and make me feel like I will never be 
> at that level.


Yes, your question made me wonder if it wouldn't be nice to have a cygwin-unix-questions mailing list, but then it occurred to me that then we'd have endless and indignant discussions of whether something is cygwin or unix-specific.

The current method of "survival of the fittest" seems to work best - if you can pose your question in an interesting manner, it'll get attention, whether it's a unix question or not.  People scan the available threads for one that interests them and skip over ones that seem boring.

The only thing I'm missing is a nice way to directly reference an entry that I read on the maillist
server so that I get merged into the thread.  As it is, I'm switching to "raw-text", grabbing the
Referenced-Mail (or whatever it's called) and referencing that in my contribution.

Because I use the same Subject line, I seem to get positioned into the correct thread, but not at
the correct place.


-- 

----------------
Thomas Mellman
thomas@mellman.net
______________________________________________________________________________
Jetzt testen fur 1 Euro! Ihr All-in-one-Paket! 
https://digitaledienste.web.de/Club/?mc=021106


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 01:54:54PM +0200, Thomas Mellman wrote:
>The only thing I'm missing is a nice way to directly reference an entry
>that I read on the maillist server so that I get merged into the
>thread.  As it is, I'm switching to "raw-text", grabbing the
>Referenced-Mail (or whatever it's called) and referencing that in my
>contribution.

Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read it
via news.

Discussions of the best way to reply to email from the *web* are both
uninteresting and off-topic.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Philippe Bastiani]

Hi,

> Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read it
> via news.

We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server...

But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the beginners,
for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat concerning Cygwin!





--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Eduardo Chappa]

*** Philippe Bastiani (philippe.bastiani@wanadoo.fr) wrote today:

:) > Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read
:) > it via news.
:)
:) We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server...
:)
:) But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the
:) beginners, for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat
:) concerning Cygwin!

I agree with a proposal of this type, which should be completely separate
from this list, and where people can discuss anything related to cygwin
(even ask stupid questions, in whatever sense a question may be stupid).

I see why someone would like to keep all the mail related to cygwin in one
list, but I also see why some people would like to reduce the number of
messages getting to them (yes I know about gmane.org, but gmane.org is not
USENET, just one server, which has been slow for me sometimes)

Finally, one of the advantages about a separate newsgroup is that people
would feel more confortable asking a question. The cygwin mailing list
tries very hard to have people not to ask questions (search the FAQs
first, look for a better mailing list, etc). Even though I agree with this
type of policy from an administrative point of view, I consider it to be a
bad policy for cygwin users (the ones that run the stuff that some of you
create), since real people are having a need for an answer and maybe
directing a question like that towards the newsgroup would take some of
the pressure off in sending the question to the list and getting a mean
answer back (I got one for my first question, even though I did look at
the archives and couldn't find anything).

 My experience supporting Pine has shown me that most people (not the very
technical ones), when they find a problem *in* package "X", will go to the
mailing list about "X" to have their question answered. For example, "I
can't send e-mail with Pine, why?", is a problem with the SMTP
server/sendmail/whatever, not with Pine but most people get that problem
when using a mail client, so they think that the problem is with the
client. In an analogous way, people see problems in cygwin and they go to
the cygwin mailing list to have their question answered. Part of the
solution of the problem is learning to diagnose the problem, and everyone
needs to learn to do that. Maybe one way to get this type of questions out
of here is by creating a newsgroup, but just to say the whole thruth, even
with a newsgroup to handle this type of questions, some of them will still
pop up here (for example, one could add to the policy for the mailing
list:  "if you are not 99% sure that your question/problem is related to
cygwin, simply post it to the newsgroup").

For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
independent newsgroup.

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Lisi]

>
>Yes, your question made me wonder if it wouldn't be nice to have a 
>cygwin-unix-questions mailing list, but then it occurred to me that then 
>we'd have endless and indignant discussions of whether something is cygwin 
>or unix-specific.

That's the point of a cygwin-unix list, questions can be either about 
cygwin or unix and still be relevant.

Also, a newbie list geared to people not yet weaned off Windows would 
(hopefully!) not elicit unhelpful responses like "of course you're having 
problems, you're still using Winblowz!"  Yes, I know *nix is more stable, 
reliable, and more powerful, that's why I'm learning! But it's just not 
practical for many people to chuck everything they have and start over, 
especially when sharing a computer with someone not very inclined to change.

One additional advantage to a Cygwin-unix-newbie list is that since, as 
Raphael pointed out, "Cygwin is no *nix but a posix implementation to win" 
certain questions may not be answered the same way as they might on a Unix 
list.

Anyway, until such a list is created, I'll just stick with Mark's 
suggestion of prefacing every subject header with a newbie alert, and 
hopefully keep peace on the list!!  :)

Thanks for all the input,

-Lisi


>The current method of "survival of the fittest" seems to work best - if 
>you can pose your question in an interesting manner, it'll get attention, 
>whether it's a unix question or not.  People scan the available threads 
>for one that interests them and skip over ones that seem boring.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Michael A Chase]

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:

> For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
> independent newsgroup.

So file the proposal.

-- 
Mac :})
** I normally forward private questions to the appropriate mail list. **
Ask Smarter: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Give a hobbit a fish and he eats fish for a day.
Give a hobbit a ring and he eats fish for an age.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Eduardo Chappa]

*** Michael A Chase (mchase@ix.netcom.com) wrote today:

:) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa
:) <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:
:)
:) > For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
:) > independent newsgroup.
:)
:) So file the proposal.

Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?.
Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?.

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>*** Michael A Chase (mchase@ix.netcom.com) wrote today:
>
>:) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa
>:) <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:
>:)
>:) > For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
>:) > independent newsgroup.
>:)
>:) So file the proposal.
>
>Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?.
>Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?.

I think it's a stupid idea.  The idea of a bunch of ignorant people
asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin
is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near.  However, my
opinion doesn't really matter.  Go ahead, create a mailing list.  I
won't be reading it.  Maybe somebody clueful will join.

At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic.
At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a "how does bash
work" message between the two lists.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 04:02:39PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>>*** Michael A Chase (mchase@ix.netcom.com) wrote today:
>>
>>:) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa
>>:) <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:
>>:)
>>:) > For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
>>:) > independent newsgroup.
>>:)
>>:) So file the proposal.
>>
>>Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?.
>>Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?.
>
>I think it's a stupid idea.  The idea of a bunch of ignorant people
>asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin
>is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near.  However, my
>opinion doesn't really matter.  Go ahead, create a mailing list.  I
>won't be reading it.  Maybe somebody clueful will join.
>
>At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic.
>At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a "how does bash
>work" message between the two lists.

Btw, I am not using the term "ignorant" as a pejorative.  Having read this
thread, it seems like everyone agrees that they are almost totally ignorant
of various concepts to do with cygwin and unix and maybe with things like
"how do I find this information on my own?".

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Eduardo Chappa]

*** Christopher Faylor (cgf@redhat.com) wrote today:

:) On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
:) >*** Michael A Chase (mchase@ix.netcom.com) wrote today:
:) >
:) >:) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa
:) >:) <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:
:) >:)
:) >:) > For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
:) >:) > independent newsgroup.
:) >:)
:) >:) So file the proposal.
:) >
:) >Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about
:) >that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?.
:)
:) [deleted some comments]
:)
:) Go ahead, create a mailing list.
:)
:) [deleted more comments]

Chris, thanks for your message and the permission.

Since I did not create this thread, I would not like to take the credit
from anyone, however, I would be willing to do the work that it will take
to create the newsgroup.

If all the people that agree with this idea, could contact me off the
list, so that we can start to write a proposal, and see if there's enough
show of hands to do all this work it would be appreciated.

Those who disagree can also write to me off the list.

Thanks!

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[raphael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1440 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 04:02:39PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
> >*** Michael A Chase (mchase@ix.netcom.com) wrote today:
> >
> >:) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa
> >:) <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote:
> >:)
> >:) > For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an
> >:) > independent newsgroup.
> >:)
> >:) So file the proposal.
> >
> >Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?.
> >Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?.
> 
> I think it's a stupid idea.  The idea of a bunch of ignorant people
> asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin
> is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near.  However, my
> opinion doesn't really matter.  Go ahead, create a mailing list.  I
> won't be reading it.  Maybe somebody clueful will join.
> 
> At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic.
> At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a "how does bash
> work" message between the two lists.
 
If this list would have halve the atitude as you will find on the pine
list, where Eduardo btw is doing great work, then this problem might not
even exist.
-- 
James Joyce -- an essentially private man who wished his total
indifference to public notice to be universally recognized.
		-- Tom Stoppard

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Jeremy Hetzler]

At 10:48 AM 9/30/2002 -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:

>Finally, one of the advantages about a separate newsgroup is that people
>would feel more confortable asking a question. The cygwin mailing list
>tries very hard to have people not to ask questions (search the FAQs
>first, look for a better mailing list, etc). Even though I agree with this
>type of policy from an administrative point of view, I consider it to be a
>bad policy for cygwin users (the ones that run the stuff that some of you
>create), since real people are having a need for an answer and maybe
>directing a question like that towards the newsgroup would take some of
>the pressure off in sending the question to the list and getting a mean
>answer back (I got one for my first question, even though I did look at
>the archives and couldn't find anything).

A group that does all the work to answer anyone's question, no matter how 
obvious the answer or easy to find it is elsewhere, no matter that it is 
the hundredth time it has been asked that week? Yes, that sounds like a 
wonderful thing...for the people who are asking the questions. But who's 
going to do all that work? Where you are going to find these angels who 
want to spend their free time explaining "What's bash" over and over and 
over to people who are too lazy to even try Google?

On the other hand, if you are volunteering to *be* such a person, I'm sure 
nobody here would try to stop you.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Eduardo Chappa]

*** Jeremy Hetzler (jeremyhetzler@earthlink.net) wrote today:

:) A group that does all the work to answer anyone's question, no matter
:) how obvious the answer or easy to find it is elsewhere, no matter that
:) it is the hundredth time it has been asked that week? Yes, that sounds
:) like a wonderful thing...for the people who are asking the questions.
:) But who's going to do all that work? Where you are going to find these
:) angels who want to spend their free time explaining "What's bash" over
:) and over and over to people who are too lazy to even try Google?

Dear Jeremy,

  I agree in some of the stuff you say. Answering the same question over
and over is tiresome. Right.

  However, you are making the assumption that the only type of questions
that people can ask in such a list is a basic question asked millions of
times before. I will have to disagree with you, there's no proof of that,
just an assumption from your part.

  Let me tell you how I see this. When I've supported Pine, I haven't
looked at the content of the question as much as I've looked at the value
of the answer. Just to give you an example, someone once asked me if Pine
supported justification of several levels of quotes. The answer at the
time was "no". If that person had not asked that question, I would have
never written a patch for Pine that implements such a feature. Same thing
about fancy thread interface in Pine4.44. If you believe that everything
is about the question, I believe that you are missing a lot. It's never
been about the question, but the answer, no matter how many times the
question has been asked before.

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:28:00PM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>Let me tell you how I see this.  When I've supported Pine, I haven't
>looked at the content of the question as much as I've looked at the
>value of the answer.  Just to give you an example, someone once asked
>me if Pine supported justification of several levels of quotes.  The
>answer at the time was "no".  If that person had not asked that
>question, I would have never written a patch for Pine that implements
>such a feature.  Same thing about fancy thread interface in Pine4.44.
>If you believe that everything is about the question, I believe that
>you are missing a lot.  It's never been about the question, but the
>answer, no matter how many times the question has been asked before.

Um, yeah.  This is sort of obvious, isn't it?

Cygwin has progressed because of user observations and complaints.  Take
a look at Cygwin circa 1998 and Cygwin circa 2002.

To use one example: mmap.  It has improved steadily over the last year
because Corinna has listened to people saying "why doesn't this work?"
She could have said "Because it isn't implemented, stupid!" or "Because
it is too hard!" but she didn't.  She just implemented new features and
pushed the envelope of what was supported.  The fact that mmap works
on Windows 95 at all, is a minor miracle.

However, this really side steps the issue.  Five hundred "How do I get
to the previous command in bash?" questions are not going to lead to new
insight about cygwin.  That's what we're talking about.  A question like
(to use a recent example) "Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a
console window under cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.  I'd rather
see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the
bash people to the appropriate documentation.

Basically, I don't see anything that's been discussed which will make
this newsgroup more useful than the mailing list.  We've already shown
that it won't be a very attractive place for experienced people to hang
out because, apparently, observations like "You really should read the
bash info page, specifically the section on the command line" will be
considered overly harsh.  Instead, every answer should be kind and
caring towards the newbie status of the questioners who should never be
treated with anything other than complete patience.  And, every question
should just be answered without any thought to teaching people where to
find things.

Again, I have to wonder who would want to hang out in such a forum.  I
also have to wonder how it would be possible that this one place on the
internet could be carved out differently than every other place I've
seen.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Eduardo Chappa]

*** Christopher Faylor (cgf@redhat.com) wrote today:

:) [some comments deleted]
:)
:) However, this really side steps the issue.  Five hundred "How do I get
:) to the previous command in bash?" questions are not going to lead to new
:) insight about cygwin.  That's what we're talking about.

I guess I can reprhase that to as saying "that's what you and some other
people are talking about". That's not what I am talking about. Let people
ask questions, let's see what comes out of it. Maybe a bug report in a
package will come out, a minor improvement may come out too, who knows. I
understand that some questions are more appropriate in some mailing lists
than others, but nobody has a tally of how many innapropiate questions are
not being asked, nor how many appropriate questions are not being asked.
You can not guess what will happen in there, you can't predict it, and if
you will never be there, you will never know. It's basically a situation
in which you don't want to be involved, and that's fine, but why complain
about it, if it's not going to affect you in any way. I don't see the
point.

:) A question like (to use a recent example) "Why doesn't vim notice when
:) I resize a console window under cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.
:) I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and
:) point the bash people to the appropriate documentation.

As I pointed out before, part of the problem is to learn to diagnose it.
You certainly know how to do that, and know which questions are
appropriate in each forum, not everyone knows that (as obvious as this may
seem to you), so give them a way to ask those questions, even if they ask
a question which is not "obviously" cygwin related.

Let me give you an example, I am seeing a problem in Pine (and this
happened to me!), in which I want to copy messages between systems (from a
folder in a local directory to a folder in a remote server, accessed
through IMAP). Every time I attempt to do this I get a message back saying
"closed connection (data)". Question. Do I ask the question of why this is
failing in the cygwin mailing list or not? It's not clear where the
problem is, there are lots of variables that could affect the answer to
this question. Here there are some possible answers to the question:

a) The message is not being saved in the right way, it's the user's fault.
   read the help about configuring remote folders and try again.
b) the imap server is faulty, it's not Pine's fault.
c) it's a bug in Pine.
d) it's a bug in openSSL (distributed by cygwin) that happens because
   openssl uses a microsoft library to compile its product and that
   library had the bug.
e) It's a bug in cygwin.dll

It may be that the answer has to do with cygwin (e.g (e)), or it may be
(a), regardless of whatever it is, the question must be asked in order to
try to understand what the real answer is.

Because of the policy of questions in this list, I do not believe a
question like this will come out any time soon.

What I mean to say with all of this, is that you can't know what the forum
will be like, and I see more advantages than disadvantages to its
existence.

:) Basically, I don't see anything that's been discussed which will make
:) this newsgroup more useful than the mailing list.

I am not trying to sell refrigerators in the north pole, I am saying that
there are people that need answers. You never know which question will
come out of there. You are welcome to join the project, you are free to
stay out of there, but just because it's not a project that you believe
in, it doesn't mean it will be bad.

:)  We've already shown that it won't be a very attractive place for
:) experienced people to hang out because, apparently, observations like
:) "You really should read the bash info page, specifically the section on
:) the command line" will be considered overly harsh.  Instead, every
:) answer should be kind and caring towards the newbie status of the
:) questioners who should never be treated with anything other than
:) complete patience.  And, every question should just be answered without
:) any thought to teaching people where to find things.

You've already shown that there are scenarios in this newsgroup in which
you do not want to participate, and that's fine. Everyone is welcome to
come and participate or simply not to join.  I see no reason why you put
such a bad tag in a project that doesn't exist (yet). This sounds like you
are sending a message of not participating to others, not as a statement
of your beliefs, which you have already stated repeatedly over and over.

:) Again, I have to wonder who would want to hang out in such a forum.  I
:) also have to wonder how it would be possible that this one place on the
:) internet could be carved out differently than every other place I've
:) seen.

See?

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 05:16:53PM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>*** Christopher Faylor (cgf@redhat.com) wrote today:
>It's basically a situation in which you don't want to be involved, and
>that's fine, but why complain about it, if it's not going to affect you
>in any way.  I don't see the point.

As long as you and others are going to be making observations in a
mailing list which I am reading, I'll probably be trying to correct
misapprehensions where I see them.  I actually refrained from commenting
until you specifically asked for my opinion so now you are getting it
in ever increasing detail.

>:) A question like (to use a recent example) "Why doesn't vim notice when
>:) I resize a console window under cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.
>:) I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and
>:) point the bash people to the appropriate documentation.
>
>As I pointed out before, part of the problem is to learn to diagnose it.
>You certainly know how to do that, and know which questions are
>appropriate in each forum, not everyone knows that (as obvious as this may
>seem to you),

Did I say that people should innately know that their bash question was
a generic one?  No, I didn't.  I said that their bash question should be
answered by pointing to the appropriate documentation.  I didn't endorse
calling the person an idiot or trumpeting knowledge of what is
appropriate or not.  I just think that teaching people how to do their
own research and maybe how to do some problem solving on their own has
good long term benefits both for the individual and for society.

It sounds like the main problem may be that people are embarrassed when
they are told "Here's where you can find the answer".  That's unfortunate,
if true.

>so give them a way to ask those questions, even if they ask a question
>which is not "obviously" cygwin related.

And, we have that:  It's called the cygwin mailing list.  If someone asks
a question that is not appropriate they are nearly always told where they
can find the answer.

>Let me give you an example, I am seeing a problem in Pine (and this
>happened to me!), in which I want to copy messages between systems (from a
>folder in a local directory to a folder in a remote server, accessed
>through IMAP). Every time I attempt to do this I get a message back saying
>"closed connection (data)". Question. Do I ask the question of why this is
>failing in the cygwin mailing list or not?

Is it a problem with a cygwin port of pine or with an imap running under
cygwin?  If so, of course you can ask it in the cygwin mailing list.  That
is *exactly* why we have the cygwin mailing list.

If you read this list for any amount of time you'll see that there are
all sorts of questions about (for instance) cron and ssh.  Are they
always cygwin-specific questions?  Who knows?  The questions get
answered or not and sometimes you find that after investigation they are
not cygwin specific at all.  Sometimes they don't get answered at all,
just like every other mailing list or newsgroup in the world.

Who cares?  There is nothing in the mailing list charter that implies
you have to be clairvoyant to post.  There is also no guarantee that
your question will be answered.  However, no one should draw the conclusion
that the question wasn't answered because it was too "newbie-ish" or
"not cygwin related".

Assuming that you did ask this question in this new cygwin newsgroup, it
sure sounds like you are going to be expecting some kind of expert help
from (maybe) a pine maintainer.  That might be good for pine if you are
going to be reading the newsgroup.  It won't be very good for other
packages (e.g., cron, ssh) where the maintainer will not necessarily be
reading the sanctioned forum for discussing such issues.

So, actually, your example sounds like exactly the wrong kind of thing
for the newsgroup.  This isn't really a newbie question.  It's more of
a in-depth debugging question which I would not have expected for what
you are proposing.

>It may be that the answer has to do with cygwin (e.g (e)), or it may be
>(a), regardless of whatever it is, the question must be asked in order to
>try to understand what the real answer is.

As long as you're asking a question about a cygwin port of pine, ask the
question.  I'm surprised that this is at all confusing.

>Because of the policy of questions in this list, I do not believe a
>question like this will come out any time soon.

Sorry but you're wrong.  This is not against list policy.  What could we
possibly even discuss in the cygwin mailing list if we couldn't discuss
problems with packages that come with the cygwin mailing list?

>I am not trying to sell refrigerators in the north pole,

I'm not in any way doubting your sincerity or your desire to help.  It
sounds like you're just working from faulty premises, though.

>You've already shown that there are scenarios in this newsgroup in
>which you do not want to participate, and that's fine.  Everyone is
>welcome to come and participate or simply not to join.  I see no reason
>why you put such a bad tag in a project that doesn't exist (yet).  This
>sounds like you are sending a message of not participating to others,
>not as a statement of your beliefs, which you have already stated
>repeatedly over and over.

Actually, in this thread, I expressed my opinion (at your request) here:

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01497.html
with a clarification (which I am sure was still misinterpreted) here:
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01498.html

and here:
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01510.html

And now in response to your email.

You have expressed your views here:
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01491.html
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01506.html
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/msg01514.html

(and have implied your enthusiasm about the project in other messages
as well)

So, it sure sounds like if I am repeating myself over and over, I am
probably at least tied with you.

Regardless, I am not sure why you are adopting this tactic.  If you are
going to stand in my front lawn with waving placards don't be surprised
if I occasionally wonder outside to comment on same.

>:)Again, I have to wonder who would want to hang out in such a forum.  I
>:)also have to wonder how it would be possible that this one place on the
>:)internet could be carved out differently than every other place I've
>:)seen.
>
>See?

And here's the third time, you've implied that I don't have the right to
offer opinions.  And you think *I'm* repetitive.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[raphael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1303 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> However, this really side steps the issue.  Five hundred "How do I get
> to the previous command in bash?" questions are not going to lead to new
> insight about cygwin.

Yes they will. These questions are asked by starting users who are new
to posix but might very well be window guru's. Currently they are being
putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into Cygwins
future potential. I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so
many developers come from a *.nix background and so few if any from
the windows side. Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down
intergration of cygwin into windows.

> That's what we're talking about.  A question like
> (to use a recent example) "Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a
> console window under cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.  I'd rather
> see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the
> bash people to the appropriate documentation.

Isn't that what the development list is actually for?

What is the development list for, I see most development done here.

Kind regards

Raphael.
-- 
Computers will not be perfected until they can compute how much more
than the estimate the job will cost.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:30:53AM +0100, raphael wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>However, this really side steps the issue.  Five hundred "How do I get
>>to the previous command in bash?" questions are not going to lead to
>>new insight about cygwin.
>
>Yes they will.  These questions are asked by starting users who are new
>to posix but might very well be window guru's.  Currently they are
>being putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into
>Cygwins future potential.

Please provide the URL of such a reply.  Stating that a thing is so
without proof is not useful.

I see many people patiently answering "newbie" questions here.  Surely
everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz, Larry
Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins.

I won't deny that occasionally people (like me, maybe) come across as
being brusque but I really don't think that people aren't being helped
here.  Even if it was the case, I don't see how a newsgroup would
magically get people helped.  All that it would take would be one
brusque person and there you go.

>I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so many developers come
>from a *.nix background and so few if any from the windows side.

It doesn't matter where people come from.  Theoretically everyone can
be taught where and how to find answers.

>Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down intergration of
>cygwin into windows.

I don't see how.  The project seems to grow more popular every day.
Letting people ask any old question without attempting to rein in the
questions to something manageable doesn't seem like a good way to ensure
project growth.  It seems more like an invitation to chaos to me.

>>That's what we're talking about.  A question like (to use a recent
>>example) "Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under
>>cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.  I'd rather see those kind of
>>questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the
>>appropriate documentation.
>
>Isn't that what the development list is actually for?

No.  It isn't.  Why would anyone be arguing with me about this?  I don't
get it.  I wrote most of the words on project page.  Do you think I'm
going to slap my forehead and say "Aha!  The developers list!  I forgot
all about that!"

>What is the development list for, I see most development done here.

Check out http://cygwin.com/list.html for a description of what the
mailing lists are for.  It sounds like all of the proponents of this
newsgroup should be checking this out.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[raphael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2367 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 08:58:17PM +0200, Lisi wrote:
> 
> >
> >Yes, your question made me wonder if it wouldn't be nice to have a 
> >cygwin-unix-questions mailing list, but then it occurred to me that then 
> >we'd have endless and indignant discussions of whether something is cygwin 
> >or unix-specific.
> 
> That's the point of a cygwin-unix list, questions can be either about 
> cygwin or unix and still be relevant.

Right!
 
> Also, a newbie list geared to people not yet weaned off Windows would 
> (hopefully!) not elicit unhelpful responses like "of course you're having 
> problems, you're still using Winblowz!"  Yes, I know *nix is more stable, 
> reliable, and more powerful, that's why I'm learning! But it's just not 
> practical for many people to chuck everything they have and start over, 
> especially when sharing a computer with someone not very inclined to change.

And more important, the choise between Windows and *nix disapears thanks
to Cygwin. With Cygwin for the first time people can bennefit of the best
of both worlds. I have never bee prepared to 'choose' and was always
looking for something in between. That's why I regret the constant push
of some diehards here towards *Nix. Is just arogance nothing more. At
least it shows a complete unawareness of reality. You will never ever
change a MS-Word user into a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you?
> 
> One additional advantage to a Cygwin-unix-newbie list is that since, as 
> Raphael pointed out, "Cygwin is no *nix but a posix implementation to win" 
> certain questions may not be answered the same way as they might on a Unix 
> list.

Right, whenever you go to a list of one of the packages the first thing
you will here is 'it was not designed to run under windows´. And then
come the specifics like I had in the cron discussion a short while
ago. Would this have been solved on a cron mailinglist. Don't think so.

> Anyway, until such a list is created, I'll just stick with Mark's 
> suggestion of prefacing every subject header with a newbie alert, and 
> hopefully keep peace on the list!!  :)

I second that and will start to do the same. Please be aware that I have
the resources to start a list myself. I will not do this becouse I think
it deserves a better chance through cygwin.com.

-- 
Better dead than mellow.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[raphael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4956 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:35AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>  a mail server [No Reverse DNS] with no reverse DNS entry.
> X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [20000103].
> X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam.
> X-Spam-Tests-Failed: [Unknown Var]
> X-RCPT-TO: <root@it-portugal.com>
> X-UIDL: 328756968
> Status: O
> Content-Length: 2935
> Lines: 70
> 
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:30:53AM +0100, raphael wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>However, this really side steps the issue.  Five hundred "How do I get
> >>to the previous command in bash?" questions are not going to lead to
> >>new insight about cygwin.
> >
> >Yes they will.  These questions are asked by starting users who are new
> >to posix but might very well be window guru's.  Currently they are
> >being putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into
> >Cygwins future potential.
> 
> Please provide the URL of such a reply.  Stating that a thing is so
> without proof is not useful.

Glad you ask. Examine thread "Crontab problems" 
MID <20020911204824.7327.qmail@web21008.mail.yahoo.com>
it shows my point.

> I see many people patiently answering "newbie" questions here.  Surely
> everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz, Larry
> Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins.

Sure, there are, and in just this tread f.i. Igor was of great help.
But had I not had enough net experience gathered over the years
the above first message that was even double posted to myself and
the list, might have put me off very easily. But I refuse to get
caught in the battle of extremists on both sides :-) Thats why
I like cygwin. I waited long for it. I wont let it go. Neither
will I at the moment step over to *nix. It just won't do the job.
 
> I won't deny that occasionally people (like me, maybe) come across as
> being brusque but I really don't think that people aren't being helped
> here.  Even if it was the case, I don't see how a newsgroup would
> magically get people helped.  All that it would take would be one
> brusque person and there you go.

No thats not what I'm experiencing on other lists. The problem here
is very clearly the knowledge niveau's and the trafic. The latter
has been brought to your attention more then once. If people start
excusing for putting up a question then this tells us that they are
intimidated. Why would that be.

> >I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so many developers come
> >from a *.nix background and so few if any from the windows side.
> 
> It doesn't matter where people come from.  Theoretically everyone can
> be taught where and how to find answers.

Sure and they theoretically would :-)

> >Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down intergration of
> >cygwin into windows.
> 
> I don't see how.  The project seems to grow more popular every day.
> Letting people ask any old question without attempting to rein in the
> questions to something manageable doesn't seem like a good way to ensure
> project growth.  It seems more like an invitation to chaos to me.

Yes it grows, can you tell me why. The growth I see is the number of
packages succesfully ported. But how about the advance of intergration?
Is cygwin becomming a Windows hosted *nix or is it advancing into more
and melting with Windows into a Hybrid. The primary seems pretty useless.

> 
> >>That's what we're talking about.  A question like (to use a recent
> >>example) "Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under
> >>cygwin?" will lead to cygwin insights.  I'd rather see those kind of
> >>questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the
> >>appropriate documentation.
> >
> >Isn't that what the development list is actually for?
> 
> No.  It isn't.  Why would anyone be arguing with me about this?  I don't
> get it.  I wrote most of the words on project page.  Do you think I'm
> going to slap my forehead and say "Aha!  The developers list!  I forgot
> all about that!"

Have no illusions, with the growing popularity of cygwin this issue will
hit you on the same forehead untill you comprehend that there is a new
group of users that need a home. Btw: I'm aware what the dev list is for.

> >What is the development list for, I see most development done here.
> 
> Check out http://cygwin.com/list.html for a description of what the
> mailing lists are for.  It sounds like all of the proponents of this
> newsgroup should

I'm sure they will and get even more incentive to do what they are starting
out to do. A pitty really that it has to go this way. I for one don't
believe in a usenet group unless moderated and a newbee list would
really be a great solution.
-- 
Death is Nature's way of recycling human beings.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Soren A]

Eduardo Chappa <chappa@math.washington.edu> wrote around 30 Sep 2002
news:Pine.OSF.4.49.99.0209301014230.17157-100000@goedel3.math.washington.
edu: 

I have finally decided that it would seem a little _strange_ if i
_didn't_ get my 2c in here since some (with overall historical memory of
past posts) will recall some rather strident messages authored by me.
But I have, I should note, already written privately to Eduardo (in
support of his proposal, btw). 

> *** Philippe Bastiani (philippe.bastiani@wanadoo.fr) wrote today:
> 
>:) > Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or
>:read ) > it via news.
>:)
>:) We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server...
>:)
>:) But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the
>:) beginners, for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat
>:) concerning Cygwin!
> 
> I agree with a proposal of this type, which should be completely
> separate from this list, and where people can discuss anything related
> to cygwin (even ask stupid questions, in whatever sense a question may
> be stupid). 

I agree conditionally, that is, I *do not* agree with the wording "any
debat[sic] concerning Cygwin. Not that I foresee that there is much
anyone could do to direct an unmoderated USENET newsgroup in any
direction or another; but to the extent that there will be a notion of a
CHARTER (I hope???) for this not-yet-existant ng, and to the extent that
that there will be (maybe) a core of relative "experts" with some base
of familiarity with Cygwin, I would hope it will *not* include the idea
that future development directions, in-depth re-engineering of the
internals, etc [of Cygwin] would be discussed. IMHO the existing Cygwin
Lists are the right place for that, if any place is. 

> I see why someone would like to keep all the mail related to cygwin in
> one list, but I also see why some people would like to reduce the
> number of messages getting to them (yes I know about gmane.org, but
> gmane.org is not USENET, just one server, which has been slow for me
> sometimes) 

There are several separate issues being discussed here. The question of
reader (participant) convenience is separate from topicality. I use
Gmane to read Cygwin now and it is the best thing to happen to me since
I left AOL/CompuServe years ago ;-). Gmane does not do anything to
*change* how the Cygwin List *works*, however. Except that the user now
has a news interface (NNTP) onto a Mailing List (instead of having to
cope with receipt of overly numerous individual email messages), and
there's a great feature that email addresses are munged (encrypted) by
the system to reduce spammer harvesting. That isn't going to happen with
an open USENET newsgroup, btw, and all participants who might post there
are going to have to deal with the full force of the predatory mutant
beast that is today's Internet Spammer. 

So, the existence or non-existence of Gmane doesn't have much to do with 
whether or not a USENET newsgroup is to be created. But Chris had in this 
thread repeatedly written "Mailing List" where what was being discussed is 
a newsgroup, and I guess that he just 'miswrote' himself.

If it works, the USENET cygwin ng could support the further growth of
Cygwin, where "growth" is being defined as something like "numbers of
individuals in a satisfied user base." Judging from his words, Chris is
primarily interested in a definition of "support" or "growth" that is
*not* what I just defined but is instead something more like "promoting
the technical improvement and extension of Cygwin as a software system".
The two notions, which on the surface are very distinct from each other,
have a potential interrelatedness: when a "user base" grows, new
individuals with new ideas and at least slightly) differing skillsets,
will be supported to maintain involvement in using Cygwin. Involvement
in using Cygwin can potentially lead to questions about how Cygwin works
(or doesn't in some particular context) in detail, internally. Asking
questions (of one's self) about that could lead to people deciding to
put effort into coming up with solutions. THAT promotes Chris'
definition of "growth of Cygwin". 

Please note the careful use all through the above para of "potentially" and 
"could" (as opposed to the alternative explicit or implicit "will," 
"should," or "certainly").

One further note concerns use of specific terminology (as mentioned
above). I do not know of such a thing as a normal mechanism for
"crossposting" between a USENET ng and a Mailing List. With extra effort
it is of course theoretically possible but it isn't "normal" since most
mass users employ a different client app (or at least a different mode
in an application suite) to do the two different protocols (NNTP vs
SMTP). To further the goal of fostering comfort on the Cygwin List, it
could be explicitly written in to a Charter for the new newsgroup that
"there shall be no crossposting to Cygwin Mailing Lists". 


  Best,
    Soren A



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Christopher Faylor]

[I don't seem to be able to stick to my vows about not responding lately,
but I couldn't let this one go.  Just hit delete now.  There's nothing
useful here.]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 11:58:58PM +0000, Soren A wrote:
>So, the existence or non-existence of Gmane doesn't have much to do with 
>whether or not a USENET newsgroup is to be created. But Chris had in this 
>thread repeatedly written "Mailing List" where what was being discussed is 
>a newsgroup, and I guess that he just 'miswrote' himself.

I used "mailing list" once when I meant newsgroup and it should have been
clear from context.  I used "mailing list" once when I meant distribution
and that was also clear from context.  I apologize for this and the
myriad of other typos that appear in my email.

However, I'm sure you know that commenting on typos and misspellings is
known bad netiquette.  I'm actually surprised that you would stoop to it;
especially when I wasn't flaming you personally (or anyone, actually).
I thought, somehow, that you had more, I don't know, dignity, maybe,
than that.  Live and learn, I guess.

I already find the misinterpretations and strange leaps of logic in this
thread discouraging.  This message, however, has made me more
discouraged about the cygwin community and, probably people in general,
than any other in recent memory.  I know that I shouldn't take your
strange missives as being representative of anyone, however, I'm very
very tired of all this.  The level of "not getting it" represented
here, is rather frightening.

Please, please.  Form your newsgroup and get out of here already.

cgf
(who sincerely sincerely wishes that he'd never responded to a single
message in this thread)

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Soren A]

Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com> wrote around 01 Oct 2002 
news:20021002004259.GD24301@redhat.com:

> [I don't seem to 

I've replied to Chris off-list. Please, don't anyone follow-up to this 
message. Please. There's no need for it and nothing of value would be 
accomplished.

  Thanks,
    Soren A



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Soren A]

raphael <raphael@oninet.pt> wrote around 01 Oct 2002
news:20021001143546.GA276@raphael.oninet.pt: 

> Is just arogance nothing more. At least it shows a complete
> unawareness of reality. You will never ever change a MS-Word user into
> a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you?

I have to say that I really disagree with this. The specific example
given especially. I was once an "MS Word user" and now I use (G)VIM
(even to compose email). There is simply no comparison (on any level)
between the two. GVIM is the motherload of programmer-friendliness and
insanely clever extentions and capabilities and user comfort; MS Word is
designed for something completely different and does that in a way that
many people feel embodies haphazard development, obscene program bloat
and gross security openings. 

Discussing the merits of either program here is probably OT, of course.
My point is that my *own personal experience* since starting to use
Cygwin years ago (in the days of b20) is that I have been converted,
step by step, from a Windows orientation to a *nix orientation. I do not
agree that Cygwin is a blend of the two or should be seen as such (if
anything is close to a blend it would be MinGW, a topic that is ALSO
_OT_ for this List). Cygwin is an _overlay_, not a blend. 

So when I read somebody saying "such and such is arrogance" but I know
that my own actual experience confirms the plausibility and insight of
the thing which is being called arrogant and erronious, I feel I should
speak up. 

Experience (actual proof, empirical results) beats theory any day of the
week. IMHO. 

  Soren A



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[raphael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3270 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 02:59:12AM +0000, Soren A wrote:
> raphael <raphael@oninet.pt> wrote around 01 Oct 2002
> news:20021001143546.GA276@raphael.oninet.pt: 
> 
> > Is just arogance nothing more. At least it shows a complete
> > unawareness of reality. You will never ever change a MS-Word user into
> > a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you?
> 
> I have to say that I really disagree with this. The specific example
> given especially. I was once an "MS Word user" and now I use (G)VIM
> (even to compose email). There is simply no comparison (on any level)
> between the two.

The latter being my point.

> GVIM is the motherload of programmer-friendliness and
> insanely clever extentions and capabilities and user comfort; MS Word is
> designed for something completely different and does that in a way that
> many people feel embodies haphazard development, obscene program bloat
> and gross security openings.

Thats not what the users think that use it what is it used for. Large
editorial works, company letters, office tasks. Please note that I'm
not denying the Bloating and Hazards, then again it seems to come with
the teritory, qua example we can see that XFREE isn't getting more stable
and that the several OS's implementing it in production environments
are more and more experiencing Windows like problems.

> Discussing the merits of either program here is probably OT, of course.
> My point is that my *own personal experience* since starting to use
> Cygwin years ago (in the days of b20) is that I have been converted,
> step by step, from a Windows orientation to a *nix orientation. I do not
> agree that Cygwin is a blend of the two or should be seen as such (if
> anything is close to a blend it would be MinGW, a topic that is ALSO
> _OT_ for this List). Cygwin is an _overlay_, not a blend.

Blend, Overlay, words. Fact is it's neither *nix nor windows. I for one
do not have the luxury to be able to switch completely, otherwise
Suse would be running here, I'm still stuck with lot of very expensive
software not available for *.nix. 
 
> So when I read somebody saying "such and such is arrogance" but I know
> that my own actual experience confirms the plausibility and insight of
> the thing which is being called arrogant and erronious, I feel I should
> speak up.

I don't think you have to, in your case it might have worked because
you obviously can do your work in a *nix environment. A great deal 
of us just can't.
 
> Experience (actual proof, empirical results) beats theory any day of the
> week. IMHO. 

I agree, thats why I try suse,redhat,freebsd and a few others at least
once a year when I have some time to kill. But as alway's it starts
with hardware support (currently the worst thing I think is USB) and
once that's beaten the lack of software kicks in. And after that my
experience (emperical proven) leaves me with the desire for a hybrid,
with the user friendlyness of windows and the security and stability
of *nix. But as long *nix users and window users do not get together
on this, respecting eachother, the best of both worlds will never 
happen. 

Kind regards

Raphael
-- 
"Spare no expense to save money on this one."
		-- Samuel Goldwyn

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)

[Nicholas Wourms]

[SNIP]

> > Please provide the URL of such a reply.  Stating that a thing is
> so
> > without proof is not useful.
> 
> Glad you ask. Examine thread "Crontab problems" 
> MID <20020911204824.7327.qmail@web21008.mail.yahoo.com>
> it shows my point.
> 
> > I see many people patiently answering "newbie" questions here. 
> Surely
> > everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz,
> Larry
> > Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins.
> 
> Sure, there are, and in just this tread f.i. Igor was of great
> help.
> But had I not had enough net experience gathered over the years
> the above first message that was even double posted to myself and
> the list, might have put me off very easily. But I refuse to get
> caught in the battle of extremists on both sides :-) Thats why
> I like cygwin. I waited long for it. I wont let it go. Neither
> will I at the moment step over to *nix. It just won't do the job.
[SNIP MORE MINDLESS DRIVEL]

Raphael,

Put a fucking cork in it already, I'm tired of hearing you bitch and
moan about how you perceive you are being treated.  Secondly, I'm
tired of you dragging me into this when I've been trying to stay out
of it.  Yet again, your arguments have absolutely no basis on fact,
rather they rely on appeals to emotion and "so-called" authorities. 
I'm beginning to think you're going to be the next Paul Derbyshire...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/