On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 03:18:30PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 10:38:49AM +0100, John Ineson wrote: [...] > >> Suffice to say, setup.exe is not a trivial application, and while a > >> minimal version can be created quite easily, I really believe that > >> contributing to/leveraging setup.exe will be much more time-effective. > > > >Of course, with respect, I assume your position probably makes you one > >of the least impartial people on the planet. > > That's one way of looking at things. You could also make similar assumptions > about any medical specialist that you happen to consult: > > "What? You think this mole might be suspect? Well, you would think that! > You're a dermatologist!
Further proof, as if it were needed, that all analogies suck. Firstly, I *do* think like that -- it is not unheard of for medical practitioners to carry out unnecessary or ill-judged work. Why do you think people get second opinions? Secondly, your analogy is misleading. For a start, getting a mole removed is a 'no-brainer' -- unlikely to do you any harm, but potentially very dangerous if you don't get it done. And furthermore, this is not just any dermatologist (i.e. any programmer), but one pushing a particular treatment, which he just happens to have developed himself. So of course he thinks it's best -- presumably he made the design decisions that he thought best. And of course he rather see contributions made to his project than a new one. This is not malevolent or underhand, it's just an inevitable bias. And I'm not saying he's wrong -- in fact I'm inclined to think he's *right*, although ATM we probably only need a bit of the functionality -- just that these things should always be bourne in mind. -- John Ineson ``Is LaTeX hard to use? It's easy to use if you're one of the 2% of the population who thinks logically and can read an instruction manual.'' -- LL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
