On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:37 AM, Peter Duniho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's true, the phrase "riff-raff" wasn't actually used. But it's the > essence of what was written. > > I'm not reading between the lines. People are explicitly stating the > opinions I've described. I don't think you understand what "explicit" means. Nor did I even make that statement implicitly. You said in an earlier message: "But frankly, I think you already have to be a pretty hard-core Mac fan, and _really_ want to see your software on the Mac, to be motivated to spend a lot of time with Cocoa." I realise you think that's a bad thing. I happen to disagree with you, and Graham has already replied with a very good explanation of why. I don't take it personally that you disagree with me. And I agree with you about some aspects of the documentation. For example, more direct links to code samples would be probably useful. But asking for the documentation to be kept up to date is like asking for software to be bug-free. Making this happen relies on people like you. You say "The last thing I wanted to do was spend a bunch of time trying to remember what was so painful about it and submitting all of that information to Apple. Yes, I agree it would have been better for me to do that. But I've got other things to do." And yet you expect us to "move directly to offering specific and constructive help with specific problems. If someone has failed to state their own concerns or problems in a way that allows for this kind of specific, constructive help, just ask questions that will elicit the kind of details that would allow for that." I think you may have mistaken this mailing list for a paid consultancy hotline. When I ask a question on this list, I don't expect an answer. If someone gives up their free time providing me with one, I am grateful, *especially* if it refers me to documentation that answers my question (as that indicates someone has given up their free time to direct me to something I should probably have been able to find myself, without bothering them). If I don't think that my question is answered, I reply, explaining *specifically* why not. I don't just state that I have already read the conceptual guides -- I attempt to prove it. I don't want to be treated with kid gloves. And I don't want Apple's documentation bloated by such treatment. > Just because _you_ think the answers are clearly answered in the available > docs, that doesn't mean that they actually are, nor does it mean that you > have any excuse for doing anything more than just referencing the docs. I think you mean "for doing nothing more". But again, if you want people to be answerable to you, I recommend you spend more time talking to paid consultants. Hamish _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
