Re: What DO you lose with Linux ???
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999 23:57:48 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>Steve, your credibility would improve incredibly if you weren't so
>damn patronising.
I'm only patronizing to those who deserve it.
>> A local FTP client so the person can upload the file to one of the following
>> An ISP/company/orignization run HTTP server.
>> An ISP/company/originzation run FTP server.
>This is way ugly.
How so? It is the proper way and the way it has been done for the past
decade.
>It would be better, IMHO, for the mail client at the receipient's end
>to be able to retrieve the message without any attachments, then download
>them from the server if needed.
This would be IMAP. However, since most unix programmers insist on
doing mail in the utterly wrong fashion Unix IMAP implimentations, even
UWashinton's own in Pine, is sorely lacking.
>I don't like the idea of pointers to files, except where such files are
>ALREADY published.
But if the sender is the one "publishing" the file surely they know
where it is.
>> For internal corporate use, the sharing of files was, again, built into
>> the systems of yesteryear. That would be what *GROUPS* are for on the
>> system we all know and love, Unix. It is so a GROUP of people would have
>> access to read and or change files so that said GROUP of people could
>> cooperate on a project.
>And the relevance of this paragraph is?
To point out that in a corporate intranet sending large messages via
email is also a bad idea because such sharing is generally provided by the
OS. Even Windows has basic sharing built into it.
>> So, uh, Hamish, without being to provocotive for you... How, EXACTLY,
>> would you take it to some upstart developer *demanding* changes in the way
>> Debian does things even though there are clear procedures, conventions and
>> techology to allow him to do exactly what he wants if he only took the time
>> to learn it?
>I have absolutely no idea what this has to do with the issue of large
>email messages. Perhaps you could debate this with someone who does.
It is called an analogy. I know that for backwater people, such as
yourself, that is a hard concept to grasp, but it actually works quite well.
See, I was drawing an analogy between the clueless people who want to do
everything via email because they don't know how to use other protocols, the
proper proceuders, history and conventions and the clueless people who want
to do things inside Debian because they don't know about the proper
procedures, history and conventions.
IE, I have seen you vehemently defend how Debian, as a project, does
certainly things against upstart "newbie" developers. Now, if we take
"Debian" and replace it with "Internet", "does things" with "RFCs" and
"upstart 'newbie' developers" with "newbie internet users" we see that the
analogy does, indeed fit.
To put it another way, I was wondering why you were defending the
clueless view when it comes to adherence to the standards, conventions and
procedures of the Internet when you're one of the defenders of Debian's own
standards, conventions and procedures?
- --
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc
iQA/AwUBNwYw6npf7K2LbpnFEQIIcwCeL2FIQ7X4NrsvflYm5qJEydzlS4oAn38T
iWuEpiP7xtFo1iRjALSmH7lD
=EXWg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: