Re: "How to recognise different ETCH wishlists from quite a long way away" (revised)
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 04:19:55 -0400, Kevin Mark <email@example.com> said:
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 04:16:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:47:45 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
>> > If these are good settings for dupload, why is it not included in
>> > the package as the default configuration for dupload?
>> Good by whose criteria? Yours? Mine? Joe random Developer's? What
>> is more important -- speed, not seeing garbage on the screen when
>> uploading, or ensuring one always signs stuff? What if I use
>> pbuilder and it always signs stuff for me, so the check is just a
>> waste of time? What if I wanna upload even when linda crashes (as
>> it does periodically for me)?
>> Why are people so darned allergic to looking up the documentation
>> and configuring packages to suit their needs? Why must one always
>> be spoon fed pap from the maintainer, straight out of the box, so
>> one does not ever have to think an iota for one self?
This posting is very incoherent, but I'll attempt a response
> Hi Manoj, Read docs? Programmers are lazy, by design ;-)
If this compromises their effectiveness, then they deserve
every consequence of their laziness. A programmer being lazy does not
mean sloppy, unprofessional, incompetence. I think you do not have a
concept of what that statement was meant to convey in the first
place -- laziness means that programmers automate away common tasks
Indeed, the original poster was the antoithesis of the
effective lazy programmer, for such a lazy programmer would never
ever manually check that the packages were signed -- the lazy
programmer would have used the mechanism I provided, or written their
own coede to do so were it not possible already.
See, the lazy programmer shall spend hours coding away in an
one time effort not to have to manually do a repetitice task over and
over again -- something the OP failed to do.
> And if some programmer streamlines his/her debian programming tool
> workflow, would it not be advantageous if this was know?
How would your incompetent programmer ever know? The
documentation already includes the config details, which you
evidently don't think people nbeed to read. If they don't read, how
do you intend to convey these best practices to them? Sit on they
chest and yell it into their ears as you pound their heads with a
> While is may or may not be THE default, could it be put into
> /examples or noted in some dev-docs (or wiki.d.n)?
I see. You have no clue what is being talked about, and you
just want to jump in to hear your own voice. What makes you think
this is not documented? Ever looked at man dupload.conf ?
> Anyway to reduce errors like un-signed uploads is good, no?
You are prime example of why even documenting it, as it has
been done, is not much help at all.
> any way, happy hacking! Kev
You realize your sig in 9 lines long, and has zero information
content? It causes me usually to skip over your messages, since
anyone rude enough to so blatantly ignore nettiquette rarely anything
important to contribute.
Cut down your sig, and I would urge you to exercise brevity in
your messages, unless you have something of substance to say.
Seek simplicity -- and distrust it. Alfred North Whitehead
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C