[OT] Re: There's new GIT instructions on Github now
Don
nospam at nospam.com
Fri May 20 15:06:43 PDT 2011
Daniel Gibson wrote:
> Am 20.05.2011 22:41, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>> "Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message
>> news:ir67mk$2jfi$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> On 5/20/11 2:33 AM, Don wrote:
>>>> You've really got to be a fanboy to claim that git is supported on
>>>> Windows. Sure, it "works" -- in the same way that hammering a nail with
>>>> a rock "works".
>>> Fanboyism for Windows or git? :o)
>>>
>>> I'm not surprised in the least. I was just remarking to Walter the other
>>> day that Unix has become the path of least resistance for doing
>>> programming-at-large and in particular OSS kind of work, just the same as
>>> Windows is for office computing and OSX and portable derivatives for
>>> computer-based entertainment.
>>>
>>> The confusing part is that roughly all OSs offer (at least nominally)
>>> means for achieving most any given typical task, so comparing in terms of
>>> "has/doesn't have" is not relevant. It's the many little differences and
>>> nuances that add up to a long tail. So it's not surprising that
>>> git/Windows has many issues, just the same it's not surprising that people
>>> are having trouble playing media or using OpenOffice on Unixen.
>>>
>> I realize you're not actually accusing him of Windows fanboyism, but that
>> trouble with media, etc on Unix brings up an interesting issue: Unix users
>> have a real, legitimate complaint regarding those problems. And when they
>> voice those complaints nobody would ever even consider dismissing that as
>> Unix fanboyism. And when those Unix users accuse various companies of
>> playing Windows favoritism: Well, they're absolutely right. It *is*
>> inexcusable Windows favoritism.
>>
>> But OTOH, when a Unix program has a shoddy "port" to Windows, and Windows
>> users complain, all of a sudden there are people (not necessarily you) that
>> push back with what basically amounts to "What the hell are you whining
>> about? Either shut up and use it or switch to Linux."
>>
>
> It's the same when it's the other way round. "You can't properly view
> that docx file? Just use Windows and MS Office like everybody else"
> "Stop complaining that there are no games for Linux, just boot Windows
> and be thankful that there's a PC port at all (and not just
> xbox360/PS3)" "If you want to use Photoshop just get a Mac or Windows" etc
>
>> It really reminds me of the old crusades: The Linux side feels it has the
>> moral high ground (and frankly, I can't totally disagree), but then ends up
>> using that to excuse going around employing whatever normally-questionable
>> tactics they damn well feel like using.
>>
>
> The difference is: The Unix/Linux programs are mostly open source, so
> anybody can create a Windows port or improve an existing port.
> Windows only programs (that are missed on Linux) tend to be closed
> source so you'd have to completely reimplement them for Linux support
> (and even then you'd probably have troubles with proprietary file
> formats and network protocols).
>
> So if there are really big problems with git on Windows anybody can (try
> to) fix them or even reimplement git for Windows (or platform
> independent with a higher focus on Windows) - the source is available
> (and with it documentation for file formats and network protocols).
>
> I do of course understand that you (or Don) personally don't have time
> for that and would prefer if it'd just work.
For me, the issue is not that it doesn't work. I actually don't mind
that. It's only when there are claims that it does work. Denying that
there is a problem is a great way to ensure it never gets fixed.
Same thing with D, actually -- it's important for us to be honest about
what maturity level the language is really at.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list