[linux-elitists] Re: Yet another mozilla atrocity

Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com
Tue Oct 14 23:47:20 PDT 2003


Quoting Martin Pool (mbp@samba.org):

> As opposed to paying attention to the direct contradiction in what you
> actually wrote?
> 
> Rick later wrote:
> 
>   I had not been debating the merits of GConf.
> 
> You said, in so many words, (1) that gconf utterly sucks, is not sane,
> is not good design, is not acceptable, is not a good way to store
> settings, makes a mess, is unfriendly, is undocumented, and (2) that
> you're not criticizing gconf, and responses to those criticisms are
> "non sequiters".  This is inconsistent and certainly looks evasive,
> whatever your motives.

You are pointedly and stubborning ignoring context:  As previously
mentioned, I was expressing irritation at the dramatic failure of
functionality I had just been assured it was really good at.  It utterly
sucked _at that_.  It was not good design _for that_.  It was not
acceptable _as such_.

I had been (in essence) told to look at it from that perspective, so I
did.  Which context you seem determined to ignore, even after being
repeatedly advised of it.

I realise that being a literalist fuckhead is an occupational hazard of
hackerdom, but I _do_ expect people to eventually pay attention to
repeated clarifications.

At this point, I am not surprised that you are failing this basic
reading comprehension test -- but I am disappointed.

> I absolutely agree that gconf is underdocumented and that is a bad
> thing. 

Good.  You could have saved yourself considerable embarrassment, by
saying so when I pointed it out the first time.

> You can stop flogging that point whenever you like.  

Pot, meet event horizon.

-- 
Cheers,               Dogs may have kept us company on the hunt, but it was 
Rick Moen             the cats who insisted we invent houses and discover fire.
rick@linuxmafia.com                                    -- Khiem Tran



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list