Hey there, Peter Michaux a écrit : > It really is too bad so many people are getting burned by this > script.
I just can't believe you, Peter. "So many"? "Burned"? We've had barely a couple people announcing they have issues when using the loader in very specific situations, compared to thousands, if not tens of thousands, who use it everyday without a glinch, and you go "so many"? Man, you've been told, and told again, that while we value your answers whenever they are constructive, and put your technical expertise to the benefit of the readers, it is just horrendously bad form to come here just in order to say such stuff as "script.aculo.us burns," "Prototype is poorly designed," or "Prototype's API is cryptic." I mean, you created a fork, you're working on your own, and honestly, I wish you God speed with it! Competition is always good, as are diversity and innovation. But we who know and love Prototype and script.aculo.us won't come to *your* ML and endlessly bash your lib! Can't you SEE how bad this looks? Prototype and script.aculo.us ain't perfect. They're certainly not fitting the needs of everyone, and they certainly have design decisions that raise issues here and there, making tech compromises or proceeding from an overarching sense of code aesthetics you obviously don't agree with. Jesus, Peter, FINE! So does RoR, and the simple truth is: there's no point in trying to be everything to everybody. Do that, and you end up being XHTML2, WS-*, EJB2.1, SOAP... You end up with a tech so bloated its name alone is a trade joke. There are products that are better suited for every particular project. I'll bet your Fork is better suited here and there. I'll also bet I'll be perfectly fine with Prototype and script.aculo.us most of the time. I don't even have to guess: they've been a breeze on quite a few projects of mine so far. But for crying out loud, can't you grasp that you don't just come on a product-specific ML and trash the product? Especially in FLOSS? In a world of contribution, your contribution for the past weeks has turned from "yeah, I know it's a toughie, here's how you can get this lib to do what you need" to "These libs suck, use mine!" There's constructive criticism, and then there's bashing. You crossed the line a while back, and I'm sorry you did. While this ML has a rather very good mood usually, being nicer than most on newbies (a strong point, as Kathy Sierra would remind anyone), your voice (and quite a few others) are now raising an awkward echo. I understand how working on a lib with an entirely different architecture and design can make it tough for you to still be in a mindset to contribute in-lib solutions on this ML, but if the mental exercise it requires it too hard, just let go, Peter! Focus 100% on Fork, and leave us in peace, with the solution we love so far! Check in now and then to announce your new releases, so we might check it out, but don't wrap up your posts with "It's about time you morons realize what's good for you," alright? I've been mostly quiet throughout the rants and trolls, but this is the last drop in the bucket. I'm abashed at the way you go about this. Just to look at your blog entry about announcing Fork makes me sick. It's so blunt, so gratuituous. The phraseology reminds me so much of 1984, you wouldn't believe. Since when "you guys suck, I'm so much better than you" became a valid opening line for cooperation, giving or asking for help? -- Christophe Porteneuve a.k.a. TDD "[They] did not know it was impossible, so they did it." --Mark Twain Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
