This statement was more to the effect of the thread as a whole. It
seemed to me that you're request is very adamant to one specific way of
doing it (yours) rather than looking at the reasons why the developers
have decided against it (developers from two separate large and
successful products), as well as other potential solutions and workarounds..
As for the strength of the comment - I should apologize to you and to
the community as a whole. I really am not much in the way of putting
anyone down for anything. But I was getting frustrated. There are
obviously people on the list who are much bigger than I who did not bow
down to their frustration. I really do like being part of this list
because there really is very little flaming of any sort. It speaks well
for the Subversion community.
I only hope that some day I can give back a small part of what I have
Durfee, Bernard wrote:
> > Not much in the way of flames, but I just ran across this quip...
> > "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
> > build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying
> > to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is
>> As I read through the persistence of the original poster, I feel
> more and more like this is the truth...
> So you're saying that anyone who wants to have source code formatted
> automatically when committing it to a revision control system is an
> idiot? Are we talking about a feature in a piece of software or religion?
Received on Thu Jun 23 20:38:55 2005