On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:34:59 -0700 Austin Schutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Was I assuming, or was I imagining? The point is that the > community can be unnecessarily combative and ugly, a point which to > my eyes you have helped illustrate.
Well, I suppose, I am one of those you mentioned. Yes, I said
something like "Getopt::Save20Lines". Though I'm not the one started
that (I started to laugh at Johan's "Getopt::Personal::EWilhelm"), but
if that's not appropriate, I apologize. But, then, is this whole thread
that meaningless? We people here all took time to try to read, ask and
understand what Eric thinks, provide our feedback, explaining this and
that. Aristotle and I even figured out a simple solution to Eric's
problem. We have proved that Getopt::Long is not "unpredictable". It
is flexable to solve Eric's major problem. Or maybe everybody here was
doing wrong. Should we just say, "go ahead, make your day", without
even bother to watch his slides and figure out the problem?
If a blind "yes" is all is needed here, it's OK. Then Eric should
not address this issue at all. Module registration is not required, too.
But, to be honest, I think the response Eric got is a lot more
friendly than what I got about a question regarding to CGI.pm. Surely a
simple patch that shouldn't make any problem should not address any
discussion, but should it not address any attention to the author? Of
course, it's the author's decision to pay attention to me or not. I
shouldn't complain about that.
--
Best regards,
imacat ^_*' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP Key: http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.txt
<<Woman's Voice>> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/
Tavern IMACAT's: http://www.imacat.idv.tw/
TLUG List Manager: http://www.linux.org.tw/mailman/listinfo/tlug
pgpgCl8dwzmtc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
