---559023410-684387517-11291136263927
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-559023410-684387517-1129113626=:23927"

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

---559023410-684387517-11291136263927
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Nikolai Weibull wrote:

> Gavin Sinclair wrote:
>
>> Mark Volkmann wrote:
         [...]
>
>> I created that list and intended it to be for developers.  User
>> questions are welcome on the list, but I reckon user questions (of the
>> vim-ruby stuff) are welcome on this list as well.  I think it's
         [...]
>
> That assumes that every project maintainer/developer actually listens to
> ruby-talk.  A year ago I couldn, as it was being blocked by a
> anti-spam service that shall remain nameless.

A definite pain, agreed, but there are other access methods.
>
>> And I don't echo the RTFM stuff, either.  A question from a reasonable
>> person means something wasn't clear to a user that was clear to a
>> developer.  The sensible resolution: developer thanks user and tries
>> to make the software clearer in what it's doing, or whatever.  So
>> thanks, Mark.
>
> How was this clear to a developer?  Dealing with Vim and its runtime

If a developer/documenter didn't document it they must have thought it
sufficiently clear for the reasonable person.

> files isn the most easy task one can undertake.  Understanding why

this is why there are so many questions [and below].  I'm still not
clear what is really going on with Vim's startup, and I conclude
that it must be the simplest thing that actually works, but I'm
still baffled after reading the docs. There's so much of it.

> something doesn work for another user even less so.  Fine, my RTFM
> was perhaps uncalled for, but I do believe that the Vim documentation
> mentions a lot of the stuff you need to know to get vim-ruby working and
> the INSTALL, README, and vim-ruby-install.rb files mention the rest.
> Apparently we must now also mention how to verify a successful
> install...were does it end?

Support never does (until the package dies).  Murphy's law
originated with people's ability to misunderstand instructions,
IIRC.
>
> But fine, Il bow out of this one, as I not responsible for that part
> of the project.
>
> And by the way, I haven been paid a cent for any of my work, soxcuse
> me if I don feel that I have the energy to thank every user andnswer
> every question.  The only thank you Ie gotten were after I flew off
> the handle last time and more or less demanded them [ruby-talk: 143461].

I sympathise, and conclude that this is probably symptomatic of the
frustrations people are "expected" to have with computers: they get
used to complaining about things....

> I realize that that the way open-source development works, but fuck,
> it really quite ungrateful work as it is without having to dealith
> people who sound as if they haven poked around a bit before asking
> questions.

Agreed.  I don't think anyone has found a solution for this. 
>
>> Finally, Nikolai mentioned familiarity with Unix as a prerequisite for
>> using vim-ruby.  I'm sure people who use Vim on Windows (like me) will
>> be a little surprised.
>
> nix directory structureswas the actual quote.  I believe the layout
> is the same on Windows, substituting folder for directory (thanks Bill
> for that one).

:-)
>
> Something that should perhaps been taken off-list:
>
> I guess my grief stems from an overall dislike for the over-inflated
> importance of the vim-ruby project as a separate entity.  As all (?) the
> files are included in the Vim distribution anyway, why not just keep it
> there?  So far, this separation has made us miss an important release,

Because Bram can't be expected to know every language intimately?
And for most vim users language-specific problems will look like
noise?  Keeping it close to Ruby means that the problem domain is
well understood.  As perfection is approached, so less modifications
need doing to the files, moving it over to the vim list looks
better.  I'm fairly sure that the project was started to solve
things for frustrated rubyists who were not being served well by the
vim list.  With vim subleties playing off against ruby subtleties,
the project will always feel alien wherever it lives.

> namely 6.3, that contained the old files instead.  The 6.3 release will
> finally be superseded by 6.4, but that°«s been over a year of questions
> regarding what files to use, how to install, and a general confusion
> over what°«s going on.

This is why there is a flurry of vim noise now, so we can get this
right before 6.4 comes out.  Of course, there'll be some more when
it does come out, but hopefully only for a short while.
>
> To me, _the sensible resolution_ would be to merge the vim-ruby project
> with mainline Vim so that there won°«t be any need for RTFMs from me or
> °»How do I install vim-ruby°… from users,
>        nikolai (25 years old and ready for anger management to save his
>                 poor heart)

I could do with that as well, I expect.

         Thank you
         Hugh
---559023410-684387517-11291136263927--
---559023410-684387517-11291136263927--