Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
[SNIP] Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so without proof is not useful. Glad you ask. Examine thread Crontab problems MID [EMAIL PROTECTED] it shows my point. I see many people patiently answering newbie questions here. Surely everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz, Larry Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins. Sure, there are, and in just this tread f.i. Igor was of great help. But had I not had enough net experience gathered over the years the above first message that was even double posted to myself and the list, might have put me off very easily. But I refuse to get caught in the battle of extremists on both sides :-) Thats why I like cygwin. I waited long for it. I wont let it go. Neither will I at the moment step over to *nix. It just won't do the job. [SNIP MORE MINDLESS DRIVEL] Raphael, Put a fucking cork in it already, I'm tired of hearing you bitch and moan about how you perceive you are being treated. Secondly, I'm tired of you dragging me into this when I've been trying to stay out of it. Yet again, your arguments have absolutely no basis on fact, rather they rely on appeals to emotion and so-called authorities. I'm beginning to think you're going to be the next Paul Derbyshire... __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More http://faith.yahoo.com -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Well there you name a group, the biggest lusers (Herr von Wourms) are to be found right here. They will spam, underquote, forget to snip etc. If you want to use email use an email client or be quit. I'm afraid to say I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. I don't use usenet, nor have I ever discussed this subject before. While I did find the original author's behaviour to be quite reprehensible, I don't think it was necessary to drag my name into it. You really are making a fool of yourself, which is quite funny in of itself. You should read ESR's mailing-list howto to assist in strengthening your arguments. Cheers, Nicholas __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 02:59:12AM +, Soren A wrote: raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote around 01 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is just arogance nothing more. At least it shows a complete unawareness of reality. You will never ever change a MS-Word user into a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you? I have to say that I really disagree with this. The specific example given especially. I was once an MS Word user and now I use (G)VIM (even to compose email). There is simply no comparison (on any level) between the two. The latter being my point. GVIM is the motherload of programmer-friendliness and insanely clever extentions and capabilities and user comfort; MS Word is designed for something completely different and does that in a way that many people feel embodies haphazard development, obscene program bloat and gross security openings. Thats not what the users think that use it what is it used for. Large editorial works, company letters, office tasks. Please note that I'm not denying the Bloating and Hazards, then again it seems to come with the teritory, qua example we can see that XFREE isn't getting more stable and that the several OS's implementing it in production environments are more and more experiencing Windows like problems. Discussing the merits of either program here is probably OT, of course. My point is that my *own personal experience* since starting to use Cygwin years ago (in the days of b20) is that I have been converted, step by step, from a Windows orientation to a *nix orientation. I do not agree that Cygwin is a blend of the two or should be seen as such (if anything is close to a blend it would be MinGW, a topic that is ALSO _OT_ for this List). Cygwin is an _overlay_, not a blend. Blend, Overlay, words. Fact is it's neither *nix nor windows. I for one do not have the luxury to be able to switch completely, otherwise Suse would be running here, I'm still stuck with lot of very expensive software not available for *.nix. So when I read somebody saying such and such is arrogance but I know that my own actual experience confirms the plausibility and insight of the thing which is being called arrogant and erronious, I feel I should speak up. I don't think you have to, in your case it might have worked because you obviously can do your work in a *nix environment. A great deal of us just can't. Experience (actual proof, empirical results) beats theory any day of the week. IMHO. I agree, thats why I try suse,redhat,freebsd and a few others at least once a year when I have some time to kill. But as alway's it starts with hardware support (currently the worst thing I think is USB) and once that's beaten the lack of software kicks in. And after that my experience (emperical proven) leaves me with the desire for a hybrid, with the user friendlyness of windows and the security and stability of *nix. But as long *nix users and window users do not get together on this, respecting eachother, the best of both worlds will never happen. Kind regards Raphael -- Spare no expense to save money on this one. -- Samuel Goldwyn msg10171/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: However, this really side steps the issue. Five hundred How do I get to the previous command in bash? questions are not going to lead to new insight about cygwin. Yes they will. These questions are asked by starting users who are new to posix but might very well be window guru's. Currently they are being putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into Cygwins future potential. I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so many developers come from a *.nix background and so few if any from the windows side. Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down intergration of cygwin into windows. That's what we're talking about. A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. Isn't that what the development list is actually for? What is the development list for, I see most development done here. Kind regards Raphael. -- Computers will not be perfected until they can compute how much more than the estimate the job will cost. msg10048/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:30:53AM +0100, raphael wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: However, this really side steps the issue. Five hundred How do I get to the previous command in bash? questions are not going to lead to new insight about cygwin. Yes they will. These questions are asked by starting users who are new to posix but might very well be window guru's. Currently they are being putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into Cygwins future potential. Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so without proof is not useful. I see many people patiently answering newbie questions here. Surely everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz, Larry Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins. I won't deny that occasionally people (like me, maybe) come across as being brusque but I really don't think that people aren't being helped here. Even if it was the case, I don't see how a newsgroup would magically get people helped. All that it would take would be one brusque person and there you go. I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so many developers come from a *.nix background and so few if any from the windows side. It doesn't matter where people come from. Theoretically everyone can be taught where and how to find answers. Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down intergration of cygwin into windows. I don't see how. The project seems to grow more popular every day. Letting people ask any old question without attempting to rein in the questions to something manageable doesn't seem like a good way to ensure project growth. It seems more like an invitation to chaos to me. That's what we're talking about. A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. Isn't that what the development list is actually for? No. It isn't. Why would anyone be arguing with me about this? I don't get it. I wrote most of the words on project page. Do you think I'm going to slap my forehead and say Aha! The developers list! I forgot all about that! What is the development list for, I see most development done here. Check out http://cygwin.com/list.html for a description of what the mailing lists are for. It sounds like all of the proponents of this newsgroup should be checking this out. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 08:58:17PM +0200, Lisi wrote: Yes, your question made me wonder if it wouldn't be nice to have a cygwin-unix-questions mailing list, but then it occurred to me that then we'd have endless and indignant discussions of whether something is cygwin or unix-specific. That's the point of a cygwin-unix list, questions can be either about cygwin or unix and still be relevant. Right! Also, a newbie list geared to people not yet weaned off Windows would (hopefully!) not elicit unhelpful responses like of course you're having problems, you're still using Winblowz! Yes, I know *nix is more stable, reliable, and more powerful, that's why I'm learning! But it's just not practical for many people to chuck everything they have and start over, especially when sharing a computer with someone not very inclined to change. And more important, the choise between Windows and *nix disapears thanks to Cygwin. With Cygwin for the first time people can bennefit of the best of both worlds. I have never bee prepared to 'choose' and was always looking for something in between. That's why I regret the constant push of some diehards here towards *Nix. Is just arogance nothing more. At least it shows a complete unawareness of reality. You will never ever change a MS-Word user into a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you? One additional advantage to a Cygwin-unix-newbie list is that since, as Raphael pointed out, Cygwin is no *nix but a posix implementation to win certain questions may not be answered the same way as they might on a Unix list. Right, whenever you go to a list of one of the packages the first thing you will here is 'it was not designed to run under windows´. And then come the specifics like I had in the cron discussion a short while ago. Would this have been solved on a cron mailinglist. Don't think so. Anyway, until such a list is created, I'll just stick with Mark's suggestion of prefacing every subject header with a newbie alert, and hopefully keep peace on the list!! :) I second that and will start to do the same. Please be aware that I have the resources to start a list myself. I will not do this becouse I think it deserves a better chance through cygwin.com. -- Better dead than mellow. msg10063/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
As a newbie to cygwin I'd like to put a comment in on this one. Even if people are brusque, without being a downright rude, newbie's, like moi, learn and more importantly are helped to learn what questions are apropos on what lists. Per haps even more importantly we also learn how to frame our questions in terms of the group speak. Hell, be brusque, but do so in a constructive manner. Sometimes faq's and archives are difficult to go through unless you know exactly how to frame your searches. Thanks for the bandwidth, Frank -Original Message- From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin) snippage -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:35AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: a mail server [No Reverse DNS] with no reverse DNS entry. X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [2103]. X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: [Unknown Var] X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-UIDL: 328756968 Status: O Content-Length: 2935 Lines: 70 On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 09:30:53AM +0100, raphael wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 07:22:35PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: However, this really side steps the issue. Five hundred How do I get to the previous command in bash? questions are not going to lead to new insight about cygwin. Yes they will. These questions are asked by starting users who are new to posix but might very well be window guru's. Currently they are being putt off in a very rude way by a few people, thus cutting into Cygwins future potential. Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so without proof is not useful. Glad you ask. Examine thread Crontab problems MID [EMAIL PROTECTED] it shows my point. I see many people patiently answering newbie questions here. Surely everyone has seen answers from (to name a few) Randle Schulz, Larry Hall, Igor Pechtchanski, and Robert Collins. Sure, there are, and in just this tread f.i. Igor was of great help. But had I not had enough net experience gathered over the years the above first message that was even double posted to myself and the list, might have put me off very easily. But I refuse to get caught in the battle of extremists on both sides :-) Thats why I like cygwin. I waited long for it. I wont let it go. Neither will I at the moment step over to *nix. It just won't do the job. I won't deny that occasionally people (like me, maybe) come across as being brusque but I really don't think that people aren't being helped here. Even if it was the case, I don't see how a newsgroup would magically get people helped. All that it would take would be one brusque person and there you go. No thats not what I'm experiencing on other lists. The problem here is very clearly the knowledge niveau's and the trafic. The latter has been brought to your attention more then once. If people start excusing for putting up a question then this tells us that they are intimidated. Why would that be. I refuse to believe that it is hystorical that so many developers come from a *.nix background and so few if any from the windows side. It doesn't matter where people come from. Theoretically everyone can be taught where and how to find answers. Sure and they theoretically would :-) Eventually IMHO the current behaviour will slow down intergration of cygwin into windows. I don't see how. The project seems to grow more popular every day. Letting people ask any old question without attempting to rein in the questions to something manageable doesn't seem like a good way to ensure project growth. It seems more like an invitation to chaos to me. Yes it grows, can you tell me why. The growth I see is the number of packages succesfully ported. But how about the advance of intergration? Is cygwin becomming a Windows hosted *nix or is it advancing into more and melting with Windows into a Hybrid. The primary seems pretty useless. That's what we're talking about. A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. Isn't that what the development list is actually for? No. It isn't. Why would anyone be arguing with me about this? I don't get it. I wrote most of the words on project page. Do you think I'm going to slap my forehead and say Aha! The developers list! I forgot all about that! Have no illusions, with the growing popularity of cygwin this issue will hit you on the same forehead untill you comprehend that there is a new group of users that need a home. Btw: I'm aware what the dev list is for. What is the development list for, I see most development done here. Check out http://cygwin.com/list.html for a description of what the mailing lists are for. It sounds like all of the proponents of this newsgroup should I'm sure they will and get even more incentive to do what they are starting out to do. A pitty really that it has to go this way. I for one don't believe in a usenet group unless moderated and a newbee list would really be a great solution. -- Death is Nature's way of recycling human beings. msg10079/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:25:00AM -0500, Lane, Frank L wrote: As a newbie to cygwin I'd like to put a comment in on this one. Even if people are brusque, without being a downright rude, newbie's, like moi, learn and more importantly are helped to learn what questions are apropos on what lists. Perhaps even more importantly we also learn how to frame our questions in terms of the group speak. Hell, be brusque, but do so in a constructive manner. Sometimes faq's and archives are difficult to go through unless you know exactly how to frame your searches. Thanks for the bandwidth, I'm not sure what you're saying but, sure, unhelpful responses are... unhelpful. I will occasionally post an attempt at a humorous response but I usually only do this when I know that one of the regulars will be following along behind me, cleaning up behind me with an actual answer to a question. As I keep saying, I think that 99% of the responses here are pretty helpful. Otherwise, your points are all well taken. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
From: raphael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin) On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:35AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so without proof is not useful. Glad you ask. Examine thread Crontab problems MID [EMAIL PROTECTED] it shows my point. If that's your point it's a pretty weak one. You got two answers to your question. One discussed the issue at length in a way you found useful. The other was a correct answer, although unnecessarily succinct. Nicholas is known to have a strange vi fetish but it's really quite harmless. It takes two to tango and if you hadn't gone out of YOUR way to provoke a fight the subsequent flame-fest could have been avoided. Anyway, please go ahead and start your list. I'm getting tired of reading about it. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 02:14:27PM -0400, Robinow, David wrote: From: raphael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin) On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:35AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: Please provide the URL of such a reply. Stating that a thing is so without proof is not useful. Glad you ask. Examine thread Crontab problems MID [EMAIL PROTECTED] it shows my point. If that's your point it's a pretty weak one. You got two answers to your question. One discussed the issue at length in a way you found useful. The other was a correct answer, although unnecessarily succinct. Nicholas is known to have a strange vi fetish but it's really quite harmless. It takes two to tango and if you hadn't gone out of YOUR way to provoke a fight the subsequent flame-fest could have been avoided. Anyway, please go ahead and start your list. I'm getting tired of reading about it. Good advice. Thanks, David. I'll stop arguing now, too. I thought there were some correctable misconceptions here but I think I over-optimistically added one too many adjectives to my thinking. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Eduardo Chappa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote around 30 Sep 2002 news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. edu: I have finally decided that it would seem a little _strange_ if i _didn't_ get my 2c in here since some (with overall historical memory of past posts) will recall some rather strident messages authored by me. But I have, I should note, already written privately to Eduardo (in support of his proposal, btw). *** Philippe Bastiani ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or :read ) it via news. :) :) We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server... :) :) But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the :) beginners, for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat :) concerning Cygwin! I agree with a proposal of this type, which should be completely separate from this list, and where people can discuss anything related to cygwin (even ask stupid questions, in whatever sense a question may be stupid). I agree conditionally, that is, I *do not* agree with the wording any debat[sic] concerning Cygwin. Not that I foresee that there is much anyone could do to direct an unmoderated USENET newsgroup in any direction or another; but to the extent that there will be a notion of a CHARTER (I hope???) for this not-yet-existant ng, and to the extent that that there will be (maybe) a core of relative experts with some base of familiarity with Cygwin, I would hope it will *not* include the idea that future development directions, in-depth re-engineering of the internals, etc [of Cygwin] would be discussed. IMHO the existing Cygwin Lists are the right place for that, if any place is. I see why someone would like to keep all the mail related to cygwin in one list, but I also see why some people would like to reduce the number of messages getting to them (yes I know about gmane.org, but gmane.org is not USENET, just one server, which has been slow for me sometimes) There are several separate issues being discussed here. The question of reader (participant) convenience is separate from topicality. I use Gmane to read Cygwin now and it is the best thing to happen to me since I left AOL/CompuServe years ago ;-). Gmane does not do anything to *change* how the Cygwin List *works*, however. Except that the user now has a news interface (NNTP) onto a Mailing List (instead of having to cope with receipt of overly numerous individual email messages), and there's a great feature that email addresses are munged (encrypted) by the system to reduce spammer harvesting. That isn't going to happen with an open USENET newsgroup, btw, and all participants who might post there are going to have to deal with the full force of the predatory mutant beast that is today's Internet Spammer. So, the existence or non-existence of Gmane doesn't have much to do with whether or not a USENET newsgroup is to be created. But Chris had in this thread repeatedly written Mailing List where what was being discussed is a newsgroup, and I guess that he just 'miswrote' himself. If it works, the USENET cygwin ng could support the further growth of Cygwin, where growth is being defined as something like numbers of individuals in a satisfied user base. Judging from his words, Chris is primarily interested in a definition of support or growth that is *not* what I just defined but is instead something more like promoting the technical improvement and extension of Cygwin as a software system. The two notions, which on the surface are very distinct from each other, have a potential interrelatedness: when a user base grows, new individuals with new ideas and at least slightly) differing skillsets, will be supported to maintain involvement in using Cygwin. Involvement in using Cygwin can potentially lead to questions about how Cygwin works (or doesn't in some particular context) in detail, internally. Asking questions (of one's self) about that could lead to people deciding to put effort into coming up with solutions. THAT promotes Chris' definition of growth of Cygwin. Please note the careful use all through the above para of potentially and could (as opposed to the alternative explicit or implicit will, should, or certainly). One further note concerns use of specific terminology (as mentioned above). I do not know of such a thing as a normal mechanism for crossposting between a USENET ng and a Mailing List. With extra effort it is of course theoretically possible but it isn't normal since most mass users employ a different client app (or at least a different mode in an application suite) to do the two different protocols (NNTP vs SMTP). To further the goal of fostering comfort on the Cygwin List, it could be explicitly written in to a Charter for the new newsgroup that there shall be no crossposting to Cygwin Mailing Lists. Best, Soren A -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
[I don't seem to be able to stick to my vows about not responding lately, but I couldn't let this one go. Just hit delete now. There's nothing useful here.] On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 11:58:58PM +, Soren A wrote: So, the existence or non-existence of Gmane doesn't have much to do with whether or not a USENET newsgroup is to be created. But Chris had in this thread repeatedly written Mailing List where what was being discussed is a newsgroup, and I guess that he just 'miswrote' himself. I used mailing list once when I meant newsgroup and it should have been clear from context. I used mailing list once when I meant distribution and that was also clear from context. I apologize for this and the myriad of other typos that appear in my email. However, I'm sure you know that commenting on typos and misspellings is known bad netiquette. I'm actually surprised that you would stoop to it; especially when I wasn't flaming you personally (or anyone, actually). I thought, somehow, that you had more, I don't know, dignity, maybe, than that. Live and learn, I guess. I already find the misinterpretations and strange leaps of logic in this thread discouraging. This message, however, has made me more discouraged about the cygwin community and, probably people in general, than any other in recent memory. I know that I shouldn't take your strange missives as being representative of anyone, however, I'm very very tired of all this. The level of not getting it represented here, is rather frightening. Please, please. Form your newsgroup and get out of here already. cgf (who sincerely sincerely wishes that he'd never responded to a single message in this thread) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote around 01 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [I don't seem to I've replied to Chris off-list. Please, don't anyone follow-up to this message. Please. There's no need for it and nothing of value would be accomplished. Thanks, Soren A -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote around 01 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is just arogance nothing more. At least it shows a complete unawareness of reality. You will never ever change a MS-Word user into a VIM or EMAC user. And why would you? I have to say that I really disagree with this. The specific example given especially. I was once an MS Word user and now I use (G)VIM (even to compose email). There is simply no comparison (on any level) between the two. GVIM is the motherload of programmer-friendliness and insanely clever extentions and capabilities and user comfort; MS Word is designed for something completely different and does that in a way that many people feel embodies haphazard development, obscene program bloat and gross security openings. Discussing the merits of either program here is probably OT, of course. My point is that my *own personal experience* since starting to use Cygwin years ago (in the days of b20) is that I have been converted, step by step, from a Windows orientation to a *nix orientation. I do not agree that Cygwin is a blend of the two or should be seen as such (if anything is close to a blend it would be MinGW, a topic that is ALSO _OT_ for this List). Cygwin is an _overlay_, not a blend. So when I read somebody saying such and such is arrogance but I know that my own actual experience confirms the plausibility and insight of the thing which is being called arrogant and erronious, I feel I should speak up. Experience (actual proof, empirical results) beats theory any day of the week. IMHO. Soren A -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
20020926063518 dot GA1292 at raphael dot oninet dot pt The Cygwin list seems to do fine, though a beginners list would be nice. I would definitely appreciate a beginner's list, one where we could ask questions like Hey, I'm not even sure if this is a Cygwin question or a specific application question but could anyone help... This *is* the beginners list. The experts list is cygwin-developers. I'm afraid that the call for a beginners-list springs from a desire to get rid of all the stupid questions, which is generally defined as everybody-else's question but mine. If we define a still-more-beginner's list, it will be a write-only list. The amount of traffic on this list is *very* (see? not shouting) overwhelming, and I for one am a complete Unix newbie trying to makes sense of a *lot* of new information. Try http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/ (or http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-10) It works great for me. -- Thomas Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Den Komfort von WEB.DE FreeMail nutzen, aber die alten E-Mail-Adressen nicht aufgeben? Kein Problem: http://freemail.web.de/?mc=021128 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
OK, let me clarify - I guess what I would really like is a Cygwin-specific *Unix* beginner's list. My desire is not to get rid of stupid questions, since I think all my questions are probably stupid, but rather the questions that are just over my head and make me feel like I will never be at that level. What I want probably does not exist, since most people probably do not use Cygwin the way I do. I am using it as a way to learn Unix on my Windows machine without having to partition my hard drive and risk any of my Windows data. Maybe I should just join a Unix newbie list, any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks, -Lisi At 01:08 PM 9/30/02 +0200, Thomas Mellman wrote: 20020926063518 dot GA1292 at raphael dot oninet dot pt The Cygwin list seems to do fine, though a beginners list would be nice. I would definitely appreciate a beginner's list, one where we could ask questions like Hey, I'm not even sure if this is a Cygwin question or a specific application question but could anyone help... This *is* the beginners list. The experts list is cygwin-developers. I'm afraid that the call for a beginners-list springs from a desire to get rid of all the stupid questions, which is generally defined as everybody-else's question but mine. If we define a still-more-beginner's list, it will be a write-only list. The amount of traffic on this list is *very* (see? not shouting) overwhelming, and I for one am a complete Unix newbie trying to makes sense of a *lot* of new information. Try http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-09/ (or http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-10) It works great for me. -- Thomas Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Den Komfort von WEB.DE FreeMail nutzen, aber die alten E-Mail-Adressen nicht aufgeben? Kein Problem: http://freemail.web.de/?mc=021128 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 02:31:35PM +0200, Lisi wrote: Maybe I should just join a Unix newbie list, any suggestions are appreciated. The standard suggestion, use google: http://www.google.com/search?q=unix+newbie cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 01:54:54PM +0200, Thomas Mellman wrote: The only thing I'm missing is a nice way to directly reference an entry that I read on the maillist server so that I get merged into the thread. As it is, I'm switching to raw-text, grabbing the Referenced-Mail (or whatever it's called) and referencing that in my contribution. Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read it via news. Discussions of the best way to reply to email from the *web* are both uninteresting and off-topic. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
OK, let me clarify - I guess what I would really like is a Cygwin-specific *Unix* beginner's list. My desire is not to get rid of stupid questions, since I think all my questions are probably stupid, but rather the questions that are just over my head and make me feel like I will never be at that level. I don't think anyone objects to newbie questions on this list. My suggestion is that people use the Subject: header appropriately to filter questions that do and don't interest them. If newbies include [Newbie], or something like it, in the subject, then people who like to help new users will probably respond. People with less time or interest in training a new generation will likewise be grateful for the hint and can skip the whole thread. In the same manner, new users should not feel compelled to read any thread titled Can't link xyz.dll from gcc3.2-dev, as they'd probably just be wasting their time. Come back to those later when (and if) you ever have a need for that level of detail. On the other hand, there's no reason to ever feel depressed by ignorance. There is so much knowledge in the world that everyone has huge gaps in their education (including the most technically literate contributors to this list). Ignorance != stupidity. It just means you have some more reading to do :-) For what it's worth, this is a decent Unix newbie site: http://www.ugu.com/sui/ugu/show?help.beginners. The best all-time value for buying Unix knowledge was the O'Reilly Unix Bookshelf (http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/unixcd/) which they have foolishly allowed to go out of print (again). Happily, you can now get them used on the super-cheap: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/offering/list/-/059606 What I want probably does not exist, since most people probably do not use Cygwin the way I do. I am using it as a way to learn Unix on my Windows machine without having to partition my hard drive and risk any of my Windows data. That's an excellent and common use for Cygwin (and now, Mac OS X :-) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Hi, Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read it via news. We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server... But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the beginners, for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat concerning Cygwin! -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
*** Philippe Bastiani ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) Either actually read the mailing list via email as intended or read :) it via news. :) :) We can read/write messages via news.gmane.org server... :) :) But, IMHO, a group of discussion would be very useful: for the :) beginners, for 'repeat' questions and problems, ..., for any debat :) concerning Cygwin! I agree with a proposal of this type, which should be completely separate from this list, and where people can discuss anything related to cygwin (even ask stupid questions, in whatever sense a question may be stupid). I see why someone would like to keep all the mail related to cygwin in one list, but I also see why some people would like to reduce the number of messages getting to them (yes I know about gmane.org, but gmane.org is not USENET, just one server, which has been slow for me sometimes) Finally, one of the advantages about a separate newsgroup is that people would feel more confortable asking a question. The cygwin mailing list tries very hard to have people not to ask questions (search the FAQs first, look for a better mailing list, etc). Even though I agree with this type of policy from an administrative point of view, I consider it to be a bad policy for cygwin users (the ones that run the stuff that some of you create), since real people are having a need for an answer and maybe directing a question like that towards the newsgroup would take some of the pressure off in sending the question to the list and getting a mean answer back (I got one for my first question, even though I did look at the archives and couldn't find anything). My experience supporting Pine has shown me that most people (not the very technical ones), when they find a problem *in* package X, will go to the mailing list about X to have their question answered. For example, I can't send e-mail with Pine, why?, is a problem with the SMTP server/sendmail/whatever, not with Pine but most people get that problem when using a mail client, so they think that the problem is with the client. In an analogous way, people see problems in cygwin and they go to the cygwin mailing list to have their question answered. Part of the solution of the problem is learning to diagnose the problem, and everyone needs to learn to do that. Maybe one way to get this type of questions out of here is by creating a newsgroup, but just to say the whole thruth, even with a newsgroup to handle this type of questions, some of them will still pop up here (for example, one could add to the policy for the mailing list: if you are not 99% sure that your question/problem is related to cygwin, simply post it to the newsgroup). For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an independent newsgroup. -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Yes, your question made me wonder if it wouldn't be nice to have a cygwin-unix-questions mailing list, but then it occurred to me that then we'd have endless and indignant discussions of whether something is cygwin or unix-specific. That's the point of a cygwin-unix list, questions can be either about cygwin or unix and still be relevant. Also, a newbie list geared to people not yet weaned off Windows would (hopefully!) not elicit unhelpful responses like of course you're having problems, you're still using Winblowz! Yes, I know *nix is more stable, reliable, and more powerful, that's why I'm learning! But it's just not practical for many people to chuck everything they have and start over, especially when sharing a computer with someone not very inclined to change. One additional advantage to a Cygwin-unix-newbie list is that since, as Raphael pointed out, Cygwin is no *nix but a posix implementation to win certain questions may not be answered the same way as they might on a Unix list. Anyway, until such a list is created, I'll just stick with Mark's suggestion of prefacing every subject header with a newbie alert, and hopefully keep peace on the list!! :) Thanks for all the input, -Lisi The current method of survival of the fittest seems to work best - if you can pose your question in an interesting manner, it'll get attention, whether it's a unix question or not. People scan the available threads for one that interests them and skip over ones that seem boring. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an independent newsgroup. So file the proposal. -- Mac :}) ** I normally forward private questions to the appropriate mail list. ** Ask Smarter: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Give a hobbit a fish and he eats fish for a day. Give a hobbit a ring and he eats fish for an age. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
*** Michael A Chase ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) :) For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an :) independent newsgroup. :) :) So file the proposal. Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?. -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: *** Michael A Chase ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) :) For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an :) independent newsgroup. :) :) So file the proposal. Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?. I think it's a stupid idea. The idea of a bunch of ignorant people asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near. However, my opinion doesn't really matter. Go ahead, create a mailing list. I won't be reading it. Maybe somebody clueful will join. At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic. At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a how does bash work message between the two lists. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 04:02:39PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: *** Michael A Chase ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) :) For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an :) independent newsgroup. :) :) So file the proposal. Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?. I think it's a stupid idea. The idea of a bunch of ignorant people asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near. However, my opinion doesn't really matter. Go ahead, create a mailing list. I won't be reading it. Maybe somebody clueful will join. At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic. At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a how does bash work message between the two lists. Btw, I am not using the term ignorant as a pejorative. Having read this thread, it seems like everyone agrees that they are almost totally ignorant of various concepts to do with cygwin and unix and maybe with things like how do I find this information on my own?. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: :) *** Michael A Chase ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) :) :) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa :) :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) :) :) :) For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an :) :) independent newsgroup. :) :) :) :) So file the proposal. :) :) Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about :) that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?. :) :) [deleted some comments] :) :) Go ahead, create a mailing list. :) :) [deleted more comments] Chris, thanks for your message and the permission. Since I did not create this thread, I would not like to take the credit from anyone, however, I would be willing to do the work that it will take to create the newsgroup. If all the people that agree with this idea, could contact me off the list, so that we can start to write a proposal, and see if there's enough show of hands to do all this work it would be appreciated. Those who disagree can also write to me off the list. Thanks! -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 04:02:39PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: *** Michael A Chase ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Eduardo Chappa :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) :) For these reasons, I completely support the idea of creating an :) independent newsgroup. :) :) So file the proposal. Sure, I can do that, but what do the people at redhat think about that?. Do they oppose, don't mind, agree?. I think it's a stupid idea. The idea of a bunch of ignorant people asking each other how to do things that only marginally relate to cygwin is certainly not a newsgroup that I want be anywhere near. However, my opinion doesn't really matter. Go ahead, create a mailing list. I won't be reading it. Maybe somebody clueful will join. At least you won't have to deal with me saying that things are off-topic. At least until the first time that someone cross-posts a how does bash work message between the two lists. If this list would have halve the atitude as you will find on the pine list, where Eduardo btw is doing great work, then this problem might not even exist. -- James Joyce -- an essentially private man who wished his total indifference to public notice to be universally recognized. -- Tom Stoppard msg10012/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
At 10:48 AM 9/30/2002 -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: Finally, one of the advantages about a separate newsgroup is that people would feel more confortable asking a question. The cygwin mailing list tries very hard to have people not to ask questions (search the FAQs first, look for a better mailing list, etc). Even though I agree with this type of policy from an administrative point of view, I consider it to be a bad policy for cygwin users (the ones that run the stuff that some of you create), since real people are having a need for an answer and maybe directing a question like that towards the newsgroup would take some of the pressure off in sending the question to the list and getting a mean answer back (I got one for my first question, even though I did look at the archives and couldn't find anything). A group that does all the work to answer anyone's question, no matter how obvious the answer or easy to find it is elsewhere, no matter that it is the hundredth time it has been asked that week? Yes, that sounds like a wonderful thing...for the people who are asking the questions. But who's going to do all that work? Where you are going to find these angels who want to spend their free time explaining What's bash over and over and over to people who are too lazy to even try Google? On the other hand, if you are volunteering to *be* such a person, I'm sure nobody here would try to stop you. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
*** Jeremy Hetzler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) A group that does all the work to answer anyone's question, no matter :) how obvious the answer or easy to find it is elsewhere, no matter that :) it is the hundredth time it has been asked that week? Yes, that sounds :) like a wonderful thing...for the people who are asking the questions. :) But who's going to do all that work? Where you are going to find these :) angels who want to spend their free time explaining What's bash over :) and over and over to people who are too lazy to even try Google? Dear Jeremy, I agree in some of the stuff you say. Answering the same question over and over is tiresome. Right. However, you are making the assumption that the only type of questions that people can ask in such a list is a basic question asked millions of times before. I will have to disagree with you, there's no proof of that, just an assumption from your part. Let me tell you how I see this. When I've supported Pine, I haven't looked at the content of the question as much as I've looked at the value of the answer. Just to give you an example, someone once asked me if Pine supported justification of several levels of quotes. The answer at the time was no. If that person had not asked that question, I would have never written a patch for Pine that implements such a feature. Same thing about fancy thread interface in Pine4.44. If you believe that everything is about the question, I believe that you are missing a lot. It's never been about the question, but the answer, no matter how many times the question has been asked before. -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 03:28:00PM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: Let me tell you how I see this. When I've supported Pine, I haven't looked at the content of the question as much as I've looked at the value of the answer. Just to give you an example, someone once asked me if Pine supported justification of several levels of quotes. The answer at the time was no. If that person had not asked that question, I would have never written a patch for Pine that implements such a feature. Same thing about fancy thread interface in Pine4.44. If you believe that everything is about the question, I believe that you are missing a lot. It's never been about the question, but the answer, no matter how many times the question has been asked before. Um, yeah. This is sort of obvious, isn't it? Cygwin has progressed because of user observations and complaints. Take a look at Cygwin circa 1998 and Cygwin circa 2002. To use one example: mmap. It has improved steadily over the last year because Corinna has listened to people saying why doesn't this work? She could have said Because it isn't implemented, stupid! or Because it is too hard! but she didn't. She just implemented new features and pushed the envelope of what was supported. The fact that mmap works on Windows 95 at all, is a minor miracle. However, this really side steps the issue. Five hundred How do I get to the previous command in bash? questions are not going to lead to new insight about cygwin. That's what we're talking about. A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. Basically, I don't see anything that's been discussed which will make this newsgroup more useful than the mailing list. We've already shown that it won't be a very attractive place for experienced people to hang out because, apparently, observations like You really should read the bash info page, specifically the section on the command line will be considered overly harsh. Instead, every answer should be kind and caring towards the newbie status of the questioners who should never be treated with anything other than complete patience. And, every question should just be answered without any thought to teaching people where to find things. Again, I have to wonder who would want to hang out in such a forum. I also have to wonder how it would be possible that this one place on the internet could be carved out differently than every other place I've seen. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: :) [some comments deleted] :) :) However, this really side steps the issue. Five hundred How do I get :) to the previous command in bash? questions are not going to lead to new :) insight about cygwin. That's what we're talking about. I guess I can reprhase that to as saying that's what you and some other people are talking about. That's not what I am talking about. Let people ask questions, let's see what comes out of it. Maybe a bug report in a package will come out, a minor improvement may come out too, who knows. I understand that some questions are more appropriate in some mailing lists than others, but nobody has a tally of how many innapropiate questions are not being asked, nor how many appropriate questions are not being asked. You can not guess what will happen in there, you can't predict it, and if you will never be there, you will never know. It's basically a situation in which you don't want to be involved, and that's fine, but why complain about it, if it's not going to affect you in any way. I don't see the point. :) A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when :) I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. :) I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and :) point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. As I pointed out before, part of the problem is to learn to diagnose it. You certainly know how to do that, and know which questions are appropriate in each forum, not everyone knows that (as obvious as this may seem to you), so give them a way to ask those questions, even if they ask a question which is not obviously cygwin related. Let me give you an example, I am seeing a problem in Pine (and this happened to me!), in which I want to copy messages between systems (from a folder in a local directory to a folder in a remote server, accessed through IMAP). Every time I attempt to do this I get a message back saying closed connection (data). Question. Do I ask the question of why this is failing in the cygwin mailing list or not? It's not clear where the problem is, there are lots of variables that could affect the answer to this question. Here there are some possible answers to the question: a) The message is not being saved in the right way, it's the user's fault. read the help about configuring remote folders and try again. b) the imap server is faulty, it's not Pine's fault. c) it's a bug in Pine. d) it's a bug in openSSL (distributed by cygwin) that happens because openssl uses a microsoft library to compile its product and that library had the bug. e) It's a bug in cygwin.dll It may be that the answer has to do with cygwin (e.g (e)), or it may be (a), regardless of whatever it is, the question must be asked in order to try to understand what the real answer is. Because of the policy of questions in this list, I do not believe a question like this will come out any time soon. What I mean to say with all of this, is that you can't know what the forum will be like, and I see more advantages than disadvantages to its existence. :) Basically, I don't see anything that's been discussed which will make :) this newsgroup more useful than the mailing list. I am not trying to sell refrigerators in the north pole, I am saying that there are people that need answers. You never know which question will come out of there. You are welcome to join the project, you are free to stay out of there, but just because it's not a project that you believe in, it doesn't mean it will be bad. :) We've already shown that it won't be a very attractive place for :) experienced people to hang out because, apparently, observations like :) You really should read the bash info page, specifically the section on :) the command line will be considered overly harsh. Instead, every :) answer should be kind and caring towards the newbie status of the :) questioners who should never be treated with anything other than :) complete patience. And, every question should just be answered without :) any thought to teaching people where to find things. You've already shown that there are scenarios in this newsgroup in which you do not want to participate, and that's fine. Everyone is welcome to come and participate or simply not to join. I see no reason why you put such a bad tag in a project that doesn't exist (yet). This sounds like you are sending a message of not participating to others, not as a statement of your beliefs, which you have already stated repeatedly over and over. :) Again, I have to wonder who would want to hang out in such a forum. I :) also have to wonder how it would be possible that this one place on the :) internet could be carved out differently than every other place I've :) seen. See? -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting:
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 05:16:53PM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: *** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today: It's basically a situation in which you don't want to be involved, and that's fine, but why complain about it, if it's not going to affect you in any way. I don't see the point. As long as you and others are going to be making observations in a mailing list which I am reading, I'll probably be trying to correct misapprehensions where I see them. I actually refrained from commenting until you specifically asked for my opinion so now you are getting it in ever increasing detail. :) A question like (to use a recent example) Why doesn't vim notice when :) I resize a console window under cygwin? will lead to cygwin insights. :) I'd rather see those kind of questions asked in the official forum and :) point the bash people to the appropriate documentation. As I pointed out before, part of the problem is to learn to diagnose it. You certainly know how to do that, and know which questions are appropriate in each forum, not everyone knows that (as obvious as this may seem to you), Did I say that people should innately know that their bash question was a generic one? No, I didn't. I said that their bash question should be answered by pointing to the appropriate documentation. I didn't endorse calling the person an idiot or trumpeting knowledge of what is appropriate or not. I just think that teaching people how to do their own research and maybe how to do some problem solving on their own has good long term benefits both for the individual and for society. It sounds like the main problem may be that people are embarrassed when they are told Here's where you can find the answer. That's unfortunate, if true. so give them a way to ask those questions, even if they ask a question which is not obviously cygwin related. And, we have that: It's called the cygwin mailing list. If someone asks a question that is not appropriate they are nearly always told where they can find the answer. Let me give you an example, I am seeing a problem in Pine (and this happened to me!), in which I want to copy messages between systems (from a folder in a local directory to a folder in a remote server, accessed through IMAP). Every time I attempt to do this I get a message back saying closed connection (data). Question. Do I ask the question of why this is failing in the cygwin mailing list or not? Is it a problem with a cygwin port of pine or with an imap running under cygwin? If so, of course you can ask it in the cygwin mailing list. That is *exactly* why we have the cygwin mailing list. If you read this list for any amount of time you'll see that there are all sorts of questions about (for instance) cron and ssh. Are they always cygwin-specific questions? Who knows? The questions get answered or not and sometimes you find that after investigation they are not cygwin specific at all. Sometimes they don't get answered at all, just like every other mailing list or newsgroup in the world. Who cares? There is nothing in the mailing list charter that implies you have to be clairvoyant to post. There is also no guarantee that your question will be answered. However, no one should draw the conclusion that the question wasn't answered because it was too newbie-ish or not cygwin related. Assuming that you did ask this question in this new cygwin newsgroup, it sure sounds like you are going to be expecting some kind of expert help from (maybe) a pine maintainer. That might be good for pine if you are going to be reading the newsgroup. It won't be very good for other packages (e.g., cron, ssh) where the maintainer will not necessarily be reading the sanctioned forum for discussing such issues. So, actually, your example sounds like exactly the wrong kind of thing for the newsgroup. This isn't really a newbie question. It's more of a in-depth debugging question which I would not have expected for what you are proposing. It may be that the answer has to do with cygwin (e.g (e)), or it may be (a), regardless of whatever it is, the question must be asked in order to try to understand what the real answer is. As long as you're asking a question about a cygwin port of pine, ask the question. I'm surprised that this is at all confusing. Because of the policy of questions in this list, I do not believe a question like this will come out any time soon. Sorry but you're wrong. This is not against list policy. What could we possibly even discuss in the cygwin mailing list if we couldn't discuss problems with packages that come with the cygwin mailing list? I am not trying to sell refrigerators in the north pole, I'm not in any way doubting your sincerity or your desire to help. It sounds like you're just working from faulty premises, though. You've already shown that there are scenarios in this newsgroup in which you do not want to participate, and that's fine. Everyone is welcome to come and
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
In an earlier post, Chris January said... Tried the Cygwin TWiki? http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/twiki/bin/view/Cygwin It's maintained by NanFudd aka Charles Howes. Just make a page for beginner's questions there. Hopefully some helpful souls will check back every so often ;) The internal URLs don't seem to be set up right; but there's some interesting things on there, thanks. C. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
Tried the Cygwin TWiki? http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/twiki/bin/view/Cygwin It's maintained by NanFudd aka Charles Howes. Just make a page for beginner's questions there. Hopefully some helpful souls will check back every so often ;) The internal URLs don't seem to be set up right; but there's some interesting things on there, thanks. Oops - I broke that yesterday when trying to get external URLs to pop up in a new window. Should be fixed in an hour. Chris -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin) From: Chris January chris at atomice dot net The internal URLs don't seem to be set up right; but there's some interesting things on there, thanks. Oops - I broke that yesterday when trying to get external URLs to pop up in a new window. Should be fixed in an hour. There's a good reason to stick with the mailing list - unasked-for new windows... -- Thomas Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Die clevere Geldreserve: der DiBa-Privatkredit. Funktioniert wie ein Dispo, ist aber viel gunstiger! Alle Infos: http://diba.web.de/?mc=021104 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 07:24:19PM -0700, Michael B. Parker wrote: Regarding the thread Moving to Usenet? (www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2000-07/msg00275.html) (which I found by via www.google.com/search?q=site:cygwin.com+usenet to see who else also wanted discussions on Usenet): I WILL FIRMLY 2ND Jonas Jensen's good suggestion Do you have to shout about that? (http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2000-07/msg00206.html) for THE NEED TO MOVE DISCUSSIONS TO USENET, instead of, else in addition to, the present Mailing lists (www.cygwin.com/lists.html). Your shouting again, please use *text* or _text_ to emphasize. While the mailing lists are an impressive and honorable effort, one doesn't want to have to sign up and manage a whole huge email list to just involved in a few issues. How does this differ on the usenet? It's very off-putting, a waste of bandwidth, and only cost-effective if you're really involved. You have a point there, a mailinglists avoids trolls and spammer who are not really involved. While it might be okay for those already heavy involved (so they might not want to change anything), it definitely puts off newcomers, probably hundreds or thousands of people who would otherwise get involved (and so may not be hear to speak up). I here them already, Is there a Pinball program for Cygwin. To avoid the flood of emails I'd get if I'd subscribe, I'm having to read the EMAIL list with a WEB browser, yet reply via email; that wasn't the intended use; Try procmail? but I would never want to store, sort thru, thread, and search the flood of emails I would get if I subscribed; Your choise. Google is much better for that. And for the millions of users on web email as Yahoo and Hotmail, such advanced filtering and threading of email typically isn't even possible, even if the user had the space to do it. Well there you name a group, the biggest lusers (Herr von Wourms) are to be found right here. They will spam, underquote, forget to snip etc. If you want to use email use an email client or be quit. Email lists CAN work for an initial small number of very involved people, but not for a large crowd who are mostly loosely involved. The Cygwin list seems to do fine, though a beginners list would be nice. And, in response to Chris Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])'s concern that sources.redhat.com does not have the software, the capacity, or the manpower to operate a news server (However, if you think that this is a good idea, please do look into setting up something like an alt.os.cygwin newsgroup), with today's tricks, MOVING TO USENET MAY NOT BE AS DIFFICULT AS IT APPEARS. It never has been and merely consist off a newsgroup creation procedure. http://groups.google.com allows users to read and post to Usenet without subscribing to anything (so simple to use and no load on the source servers). Please explain that. All you'd have to do is to find someone to host the master copy of the Usenet group, and you'd be set. What is a mastercopy? I seriously doubt you know what you are speaking about. I'm not experienced with hosting or starting a Usenet group, but if you're already (thankfully) going to the trouble to archive this email list on www.cygwin.com (which also DOES take the actual traffic of readers), it wouldn't seem that much harder to set up a real server. Here you are right. Finally. However, though I don't know if he'll do it, MY GOOD FRIEND Matt Bartley Are you starting to shout again? (see CC), who has extensive Usenet experience, MIGHT BE INTERESTED Did he pass his knowledge to you? O dear. in helping with this, since he loves Linux Unix, and something like www.cygwin.com which, clearly and strongly, brings this wonderful Unix stuff into the Windows world should make him very happy. Throw a party. AND I WILL DONATE USE OF AN EXCHANGE SERVER for this purpose, Let me guess, a commodore 64 or an amiga? if someone with Usenet experience will set it up. (Unless it's enormous bandwidth with no funding for it (which doesn't seem likely if the postings which can be fed to other Usenet servers for reading)). At C**ex, we're willing to donate Windows hosting for those who will help get it working. See www.C**ex.com/Hosting/4Help for other offers. A just a luser Spammer. Now I get it. I think you are steeply underestimating the intelligence of the people on this list. Now go away. -- In any world menu, Canada must be considered the vichyssoise of nations -- it's cold, half-French, and difficult to stir. -- Stuart Keate msg09835/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
The Cygwin list seems to do fine, though a beginners list would be nice. I would definitely appreciate a beginner's list, one where we could ask questions like Hey, I'm not even sure if this is a Cygwin question or a specific application question but could anyone help... The amount of traffic on this list is *very* (see? not shouting) overwhelming, and I for one am a complete Unix newbie trying to makes sense of a *lot* of new information. -Lisi -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
The Cygwin list seems to do fine, though a beginners list would be nice. I would definitely appreciate a beginner's list, one where we could ask questions like Hey, I'm not even sure if this is a Cygwin question or a specific application question but could anyone help... The amount of traffic on this list is *very* (see? not shouting) overwhelming, and I for one am a complete Unix newbie trying to makes sense of a *lot* of new information. Tried the Cygwin TWiki? http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/twiki/bin/view/Cygwin It's maintained by NanFudd aka Charles Howes. Just make a page for beginner's questions there. Hopefully some helpful souls will check back every so often ;) Chris -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
