Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre...

Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-22T19:41:16Z

<cc list trimmed because this is getting silly>

At 19:47 21/04/02, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>On Monday 22 April 2002 20:29, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > >Please don't assign me membership in any anti-bitkeeper crew. I am not
> > >anti-BitKeeper. If you must have an epithet, try
> > >"anti-advertising-in-the-tree"
> > >crew.
> >
> > Oh I wasn't refering just to you.
>
>Don't refer to me at all in that context, thankyou.

Ok, no problem.

> > I was refering to the "silently seething"
> > kernel hackers you mentioned but refused to name...
>
>Indeed. Please get a clue a read the thread. Sheesh. No, I'm still not
>going to name anybody, figure it out yourself.

Anyone not prepared to say their name obviously doesn't care enough about
the issue therefore their needs need not be considered (pun intended).
Considering you are speaking for others who as we said before do not care
enough you don't speak for any one who cares anough so you should stop now.
Sounds harsh? It's the truth. Think about it. At least you claim to not be
an anti-bk person but that you speak for the many anti-bk people. I have to
still read from a single line from one of those imaginary figures you have
in your head...

> > > > then moving the
> > > > document out won't either, so moving it out would be a waste of time in
> > > > addition to penalizing people who want to use bitkeeper, which is
> unfair
> > > > and incorrect.
> > >
> > >Changing the documents for a url penalizes you exactly how?
> >
> > You obviously didn't read my mail properly. )-:
> >
> > It is an inconvenience having to go lookup some website instead of having
> > the doc right there.
>
>Good thing you've got a computer to look it up for you then, isn't it.
>(moral of this, don't say really stupid things if you don't want an even
>stupider reply).

I didn't say anything stupid. You did. And your reply is out of context
because I am talking about disconnectedness.

> > What part of that do you not understand?
>
>I don't understand the part where you find clicking a url difficult. Please
>tell me it ain't so.

I click URL and wait and wait and I get "could not contact server". No
internet connection damn!

> > Perhaps you
> > have a 24x7 internet connection, many people don't. Perhaps this is a
> > surpise to you?
>
>OK, let me get this straight. You've got BitKeeper loaded on your system
>and you've got a kernel tree, and you've made a patch, and you eventually
>want to push it to Linus, or have him pull it, but you can't get the docs
>because you're not connected? Yeesh. I can't believe I responded to this.

There are people who work without an internet connection and just carry a
floppy around to internet cafes / work, etc. On occasion they use a CDR. I
know people who do that. I do that when I go on holiday. Last holiday
before leaving I burned the bk tree on a CDR and took it with me together
with my laptop.

I worked for two weeks completely disconnected. The only means of
connection would have been going to an internet cafe and using a floppy. I
chose not to go into an internet cafe, I wanted piece and quiet for two
weeks. Going to lookup a URL would have wasted time and money. If that
isn't an inconvenience I don't know what is...

If you can't see how disconnectedness can be a problem perhaps you don't
take enough holidays? (-;

Best reagards,

Anton

--
"I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.openprojects.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/