On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.syk...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello, > > On 19 December 2013 20:22, Blake McBride <bl...@mcbride.name> wrote: > > Agreed. I enjoy reasoned debate. I don't enjoy being told the reason is > > because "that's the way we do it". That is not reasoned debate. It is > club > > support. > > I believe, from reading this mailing list for some time, you must be ready > to find many stupid reasonings. But opposite is, fortunately, also true: > there > are people here who can help. > > Second, you bumped into something which is not 100% to your liking, but on > the other hand is "simple" and works. The simplicity is, in my > opinion, what has always > counted for people seriously-involved in plan9 and is one of the main > advantages of the plan9 programs. > > Third, it would be, from my experience, an error to expect that there are > no > errors/flaws in the plan9 programs. When I started to play with plan9, > I thought: > it is simple, there are no errors. But in reality, whatever I tried, > it did not quite > work. So, my advice is to be ready to find such problems nearly all the > time. > And since many people who created the programs are gone by now, there is > often little effort to correct these, even if there are true bugs. > > That's what I think. > > Ruda > > Thanks for your thoughtful input! Unfortunately, I have started and continue to provoke a most unhelpful line of discussion. Know that it was (poorly) done with good intention merely to draw a distinction between technical reasons and "that's the way we do it" attitudes. Blake
