Austin Ziegler wrote:

>On 7/1/05, Nikolai Weibull
><mailing-lists.ruby-core / rawuncut.elitemail.org> wrote:
>  
>
>>Austin Ziegler wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On 7/1/05, mathew <meta / pobox.com> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Millions of times? Apparently you don't know how to automate
>>>>things properly at the command line.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>I know plenty well how to automate -- you'd have to find someone
>>>who didn't have fifteen years experience on the Unix command-line
>>>for your moronic statement to be nearly correct.
>>>      
>>>
>>You mean fifteen hours, right, or am I missing something?
>>    
>>
>
>Mathew assumed that because I *choose* to work on Windows with
>primarily graphical tools that I don't know how to automate on the
>Unix command-line.
>

No I didn't. I deduced that you don't know how to automate on the 
command line, from your statement that the graphical tools made things 
"millions of times easier". No graphical tool is going to make something 
millions of times easier than typing one word and hitting enter, unless 
you've developed some kind of advanced mind-reading interface for your GUI.

>>What Arch replacement?
>>    
>>
>
>Mathew was suggesting Bazaar, an immature replacement for Arch that
>doesn't run natively on Windows
>

No I wasn't. I challenge you to cite anywhere where I have advocated 
Arch or Bazaar. In fact, I've explicitly posted my opinion that Arch is 
horrendous and that I made a mistake by trying to use it.

What I am suggesting, to re-state it again, is that your personally not 
liking the cygwin shell window for aesthetic reasons is not a sensible 
basis for making a decision about what version control system to use. If 
a tool that runs in cygwin does the job and is the best option for 
technical reasons, your personal UI preferences are a bad reason to 
shout down use of the tool.

Similarly, the fact that you like Visual Studio would not be a good 
reason to try and prevent use of makefiles, an analogous shouting 
campaign that would make you look similarly absurd.

There is such a thing as "flexibility" and "pragmatism". When I'm 
building Cocoa applications, I use Project Builder. When I need to build 
Java applications, I automate with Ant. When I'm working with C, I use 
Makefiles. I use the Domino integrated environment for Domino 
applications. For text editing, I use vim, vi, Kate, TextWrangler, 
ProjectBuilder, Domino, and even Notepad.exe. Many of these tools are 
not entirely to my liking--but you know what? Maturity means getting the 
job done, even if that means putting up with a non-native interface or a 
quirky command line.

> -- and got downright rude when I
>(and others) pointed out that cygwin is not an acceptable answer.
>  
>

Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. 

"you don't know what you're talking about"..."anyone who says otherwise 
does *not* know what they're talking about"..."Obviously, you've not 
tried to do a reasonable install"..."you're apparently an arrogant ass 
who doesn't know what he's talking about"..."your moronic 
statement"..."As I said, you don't know what you're talking 
about"..."your asinine snobbishness"..."you don't know the first damned 
thing"..."You can just go back into your zealot's spider hole 
now"..."you're a moronic zealot".

Recognize any of those quotes?

I think your increasingly shrill screaming and misrepresentation of my 
position makes you look pretty immature. I think it's also clear who's 
the zealot here, as I'm explicitly arguing for individuals to be 
flexible and make utilitarian choices, while you're yelling that 
anything that doesn't meet your (purely aesthetic, not functional) 
criteria is "not an answer, ever".


mathew