On Wed, December 31, 2014 12:03, Warren Young wrote:> > So, cope with change. >Is one to infer from your mantra 'cope with change' that one is not supposed to express any opinion whatsoever, ever, on any forum; on the externalised cost of changes made to software with no evident technical justification? And that to do so is evidence of some moral or intellectual defect in oneself? We all cope with change until we die. That is not a philosophy or program. It is an observation on the state of existence; and is no more useful than the observation that, eventually, we all die. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB at Harte-Lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3
On Thu, January 1, 2015 3:15 pm, James B. Byrne wrote:> > On Wed, December 31, 2014 12:03, Warren Young wrote: >> >> So, cope with change. >> > > Is one to infer from your mantra 'cope with change' that one is not > supposed > to express any opinion whatsoever, ever, on any forum; on the externalised > cost of changes made to software with no evident technical justification? > And > that to do so is evidence of some moral or intellectual defect in oneself? > > We all cope with change until we die. That is not a philosophy or > program. It > is an observation on the state of existence; and is no more useful than > the > observation that, eventually, we all die. >First of all, I must say that I agree with you, James, on almost all of your points. Or disagree with your opponents on majority of their points. Moreover, I do suffer myself from "unnecessary change", thus for some tasks I even switched to different system (if the stuff that affects you is already in the kernel, you can not just switch from one Linux distro to another ;-( I have been suggested to shut up when I was too loud/persistent saying about that (luckily I do not remember by whom and do not care to remember ;-) Nonetheless, even though I try to speak up when I'm unhappy thus hopefully I'm providing feedback for developers and architects, I came to realizing that [open source] software developers most likely will not listen to me, even though I do represent certain number of their end customers. Take as example my last worst displeasure. I upgraded my FreeBSD workstation from 10.0 to 10.1 which made me step up from Gnome 2 to Gnome 3. And I can not bear the change. So, after a couple of weeks of frustration of just trying to do what I usually do on workstation I came to decision to abandon Gnome altogether. Whoever did that transition knows what I'm talking about. It is pretty much as switching from CentOS 6 to CentOS 7. What I told myself (not that I'm suggesting others they should...) is this. Developers often work without monetary reward and their only reward is seeing the result of their programming. What they get best reward is from seeing new, fancy... Which kind of contradicts utilitarian programming (to achieve particular goal your program is for). In last case we always were following the principle (yes, I was programmer too): do not make any changes unless they are absolutely necessary. Which appears to contradict goals many developers have (KDE, GNOME, Firefox, Windows 8,... you continue the list). All seem to abandon structured logical tree-like arrangements of your tools, and switch you to stupid search for what you need. Welcome to ipad generation, folks! Thus, I decided for myself to tolerate the change as long as I can and keep being grateful to developers whose products I use, but switch to something more suitable for my way of working with things as soon as I can not stand the change. I hope, this helps someone ;-) Happy New Year everybody! (and welcome to ipad generation! ;-) Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Jan 1, 2015, at 2:15 PM, James B. Byrne <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> wrote:> On Wed, December 31, 2014 12:03, Warren Young wrote: >> >> So, cope with change. > > Is one to infer from your mantra 'cope with change' that one is not supposed > to express any opinion whatsoever, ever, on any forumNo, it?s a reaction to those who apparently want nothing to change ever again. A lot of people are constitutionally unwilling to cope with the removal of their cheese: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F Well, tough. Either you?re part of the solution or you?re part of the precipitate. Or something like that.> on the externalised > cost of changes made to software with no evident technical justification?Yelling about it on the CentOS mailing list isn?t going to affect *anything*. If you want to effect change, go join the Fedora development community. I did not say go yell over the wall *at* the Fedora development community, I said go *join them*. Get involved. Put your code out into the marketplace of ideas as an alternative to the ideas currently being offered. If you?ve truly got the best solution, you?ll start to move things in the direction you want them to go. It?s not going to happen immediately, but in a do-ocracy, those who do things accrete ruling powers. Or, you can go fork EL6 or whatever other ?classic? distro that makes you happier. That?s a lot more work and just adds to the fractiousness that?s part of the problem here, but if your ideas really are hot, you?ll cause another of the occasional shifts that happen in the Unix/Linux landscape.> We all cope with change until we die. That is not a philosophy or program. It is an observation on the state of existence; and is no more useful than the observation that, eventually, we all die.The conservative mindset (small ?c?) doesn?t want to cope. A lot of social progress happens only through generational turn-over. I?d prefer that Linux keeps moving forward faster than generational speed. That means we cannot allow change to be delayed until those currently using the existing tech get done with their careers in tech. Technology is a field for unabashed neophiles. My definition of ?technology? is the set of things that don?t work reliably yet. Once a thing has been perfected, it stops being tech. *Pencils* were once high-tech. Computers? We?re still working on that one.
On 01/02/2015 07:49 PM, Warren Young wrote:> On Jan 1, 2015, at 2:15 PM, James B. Byrne <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> wrote: > >> On Wed, December 31, 2014 12:03, Warren Young wrote: >>> So, cope with change. >> Is one to infer from your mantra 'cope with change' that one is not supposed >> to express any opinion whatsoever, ever, on any forum > No, it?s a reaction to those who apparently want nothing to change ever again. A lot of people are constitutionally unwilling to cope with the removal of their cheese: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F > > Well, tough. Either you?re part of the solution or you?re part of the precipitate. > > Or something like that.Well Linus doesn't agree with this in the Kernel - Here is a recent entry from linux-wireless "The people who are trying to deprecate the WEXT interfaces should put the blame firmly where it belongs - on the people who thought that "we'll just ignore all old history". Because people who think that "we'll just redesign everything" are actually f*cking morons. Really. There's a real reason the kernel has the "no regression" policy. And that reason is that I'm not a moron. History matter. Legacy uses matter. Linus">> on the externalised >> cost of changes made to software with no evident technical justification? > Yelling about it on the CentOS mailing list isn?t going to affect *anything*. > > If you want to effect change, go join the Fedora development community. > > I did not say go yell over the wall *at* the Fedora development community, I said go *join them*. Get involved. Put your code out into the marketplace of ideas as an alternative to the ideas currently being offered. If you?ve truly got the best solution, you?ll start to move things in the direction you want them to go. > > It?s not going to happen immediately, but in a do-ocracy, those who do things accrete ruling powers. > > Or, you can go fork EL6 or whatever other ?classic? distro that makes you happier. That?s a lot more work and just adds to the fractiousness that?s part of the problem here, but if your ideas really are hot, you?ll cause another of the occasional shifts that happen in the Unix/Linux landscape. > >> We all cope with change until we die. That is not a philosophy or program. It is an observation on the state of existence; and is no more useful than the observation that, eventually, we all die. > The conservative mindset (small ?c?) doesn?t want to cope. A lot of social progress happens only through generational turn-over. > > I?d prefer that Linux keeps moving forward faster than generational speed. That means we cannot allow change to be delayed until those currently using the existing tech get done with their careers in tech. > > Technology is a field for unabashed neophiles. > > My definition of ?technology? is the set of things that don?t work reliably yet. Once a thing has been perfected, it stops being tech. *Pencils* were once high-tech. Computers? We?re still working on that one. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >-- Stephen Clark *NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.* Director of Technology Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.clark at netwolves.com http://www.netwolves.com