Re: omg : man lb_config :)
On 12/10/10 06:09 AM, Vitaly wrote:
> Okay, I admit bad joke with a man lh config.
> However, this does not eliminate the illogical and not intuitive man
> lh_config and man lb_config
> And so carefully did not want to see here.
> As an example
> gedit -> g_edit -> g edit -> s edit
> and man s_edit
> would be very logical to the precepts of your mom?
If you are saying you don't like (or understand) the rename of the
command multiple times, sorry, that's just one of the costs of development.
As a developer, an idea you at first thought was good (filling /usr/bin
with a whole bunch of helpers which, in practice, are not called by the
user individually) later turns out to be bad (i.e. pollution of /usr/bin
is not very kind!) At around the same time you decide that the original
name of the thing you wrote, live-helper, (which undoubtedly was
influenced by the prior existence of 'debhelper' and you can see
parallels in the structure,) is no longer really descriptive of the
purpose of the software. Helper? Helper for what? So you decide to
rename it to live-build, because it's the part of the software that
*builds* the live image. Much clearer now, yes?
So what would you ask us to do? Get all of our ideas perfect the very