[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mc Digest, Vol 70, Issue 3

Subject: Re: Mc Digest, Vol 70, Issue 3
From: MK
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 08:21:02 -0500
On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 09:42:44 +0100
joe piskor <[email protected]> wrote:
> Anyways, I'll put in my $0.02 worth...
> 
> Seeing MC evolve over time - and seeing its capabilities increase *a
> lot* - I get the impression that it is trying to do a Windows (tm)
> sort of thing, i.e. being a one-in-all solution for everything - a
> solution looking for a problem to fix. By bundling so much of
> everything into the application, we're drifting away from the
> tried-and-true *nix approach to things: Lots of small, reliable,
> simple tools that can be chained together in a way to do Big Things.

I have to comment that I prefer the small dedicated tool (eg, I don't
like IDE's of either sort, etc) and consider mc a small dedicated
tool. You don't actually refer to anything concrete here, like this
could almost be a form letter in which you have simply inserted <NAME OF
PROGRAM HERE>; most of it is just vague prattle (no offence).

I don't use the internal editor or viewer, I use vim and less, which
this is easy to do and together with the F2 user menu makes mc almost a
PERFECT EXAMPLE of a modular,  extensible *nix philosophy.

So, basically, I think you have it backward.  Please tell us about which
*existing* lightweight, small, simple *file browser* you would contrast
to mc's apparently bloated "one-in-all solution to everything"...

> with - few exceptions - the New Improved
> functions don't help my productivity (YMMV); they tend to force me to
> rethink the way I perform day-to-day functions and slow me down until
> my fingers start thinking for themselves once again.

Again, this is the form letter.  Why don't you stop wasting time and
say specifically which "New improved functions don't help my
productivity and slow me down".  I've been using mc since the late 90's
and keep it up to date, so right now I'm on 4.7.  It is substantially
the same as the one I can remember from 10 years ago, I cannot off the
top of my head think of a single thing to which your formuliac
criticism would apply.

> You use a tool for a long time, and when the basics change you have a
> new tool to learn - it's not just adapting to a minor change in an
> existing tool as that simple change forces you to "think around it".

You go on an on for several more paragraphs and still fail to even once
refer to any specifics at all.  You are terrible writer, Joe.

> I get the impression that the list is
> getting bogged down in trivial items that may enhance someone's "mc
> experience" but do comparatively little for the rest of us. I've seen
> other OS projects with the ability to cast votes for new features to
> be implemented based on user requests. 

I've been watching the list for the better part of a year and the list
is exactly what the subscribers make it.  There are a couple of mc's
developers who pay attention and respond to that.  It also seems to me
that these "trivial items" are in fact 100% issues raised by the user
base Joe, so I'm kind of curious who you mean by "the rest of us".  

The idea of voting on features is an interesting one, but I think 
1) that would demand extra resources which the current developers may
not have...I'm happy to see them just actively maintain a stable product
2) as a developer, I would NOT want to bother with such schtick on my
projects.  Suggestions are sufficient.
3) as a user, I'm sceptical of the idea:  it is not something that has
immediate or obvious appeal to me.  It could turn out to be a great
thing, it could just as easily turn out to be a bad joke.

> Right up front, I'm not offering a solution to a problem that may not
> exist  [... ] I'd
> just like the those upgrades to be unobtrusive and optional. Let the
> tool adapt to the user; don't force the user to adapt to the tool...

Wow, so you made it all the way through that meandering mess without
referring to ANYTHING factual, or a EVEN ONE single feature.  How about
a "for example"?  It could easily be that you have simply failed to
read some documentation Joe -- it's impossible to tell since you won't
commit to any meaningful, concrete complaint.
 
> And get off my lawn!!! :-)

No where near it.  ;P

-- 
MK <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Mc mailing list
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>