Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Nick Jennings <nkj AT namodn.com>]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 12:08:03PM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> 
> > In the same vein, maintaining little-changed interface for users is
> > important. Users as a mass are not supposed to have active attitude,
> > although they're welcome to. My issue is that to change system interface
> >  to behave differently, like bind new action to the old button, you have
> >  to get substantial voices for it, not just reasoning. If Debian changed
> >  name of apt, or some apt options, now, would it make Debian users
> > happy? 

 Well, first of all, we are Pre-1.0 and therefore have a bit more flexibility
 since we are stil defining ourselves apart from the original SGL.

 Second of all Debian just recently changed the behavior of dselect in some
 parts. For instance, now, when you go to select packages to install, the
 generic help screen comes up and you now have to hit 'Enter' as opposed
 to 'Space' to get to the package list... Now when you hit space you get
 additional help... Gets me almost every time, but I think new users
 will get it better, I remember I always used to forget what key to hit before
 (space isn't too intuitive to continue in a menu interface).

 They changed it for the benefit of new users, not old fuddy-duddies who
 are set in their way, regardless of how obnoxious it is (even used to
 be to themselves).


> > Larry Wall wants to change regex in Perl 6 so that frequently
> > used  things are shorter to type, and it gets him a hell of  patience
> > and  evangelism to even make people think about that.

 It's a programming language and therefore has much more stringent 
requirements
 as far as backwards compatibility.. not really part of this conversation.

> > `Sorcery update' now is orthogonal to `sorcery update' which I'm used
> > to, and I don't like it. But I'm trying to comply and suggest that,
> > following Nick's logic, scribe then has to be primary command to
> > schedule and cast spells that need updating. Why not to follow the
> > change all the way through and make things orderly again?
> > Thanks for listening,
> >
> > Sergey.
> 
> Wow, very good points Sergey.  :)  Can I switch bandwagons?

 What makes you think this is a good idea? It makes no sense.

 Scribe is not responsible for cast spells. Cast is.

 So why does it makes sense for scribe to "schedule and cast spells that need
 updating" ?
 

> 
> Seriously, though, perhaps we should map this out better.  I really don't
> care what naming conventions we use, as long as they are not as long as
> your earlier example.  ;)  I'm not lazy only to a point.
> 
> Nick, thoughts, reasoning?
> 
> -One of Four
> a.k.a. sandalle
> 
> -- 
> Eric Sandall                                    | Source Mage GNU/Linux
> Developer
> eric AT sandall.us                             | http://www.sourcemage.org
> http://www.sandall.us/~sandalle  | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
> http://counter.li.org #196285         | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>