[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: use reply-to? (was: conflicts, history, and the Principle Of Least Surprise)

From: Sean Russell <ser_at_germane-software.com>
Date: 2002-02-21 00:31:07 CET

Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 20 February 2002 01:07 pm, Greg Stein wrote:
> "Deal with it"

I do, but poorly.

> I'm sure we've all seen the various "considered harmful" documents, so I
> won't repeat it here. Suffice it to say, that the prevailing opinion [of

There's a longish message by Karl waaaay back in 2000, which points to the
Unicom document, which I could hack apart, but which I'll simply refute with:

        "Make the common case simple, and the incommon case possible."

The anti-munging league violates this principle, which is the primary reason
why the rest of the world hates computer programmers. The arguments in
support of the other principles (PoLS, etc) are pretty weak, and easily
refuted. I'll be happy to go one-on-one, off-list, with anybody who

In any case, this isn't my list, it's OT, and I've said my piece -- I'll go
away now.

> those in charge of the list :-)] take the side of Reply-to munging as being
> harmful.

That is their prerogitive.

- --
 |.. "A scientist is one who finds interest in the kinetic energy of
<|> Jell-O moving at ridiculous velocities...an engineer is one who can
/|\ find a real-life application for such silliness."
/| -- anon
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:09 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.