Kent Borg kentborg at
Sun Aug 20 14:05:43 EDT 2006

On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 11:58:16PM -0400, David Kramer wrote:
> In fact, the Subversion book goes into great detail on how to
> implement this.

Yes.  And I don't object to that.  I simply want a source code control
system that is little more specifically focused on software
development workflow, I want a program that has already implemented
tags, a program that doesn't require me to notice tags are missing and
find the right section of the right book to follow some "great detail"
to implement tags for myself.  Tags are not *that* arcane.

> I suppose you're also having trouble finding a Linux distro that
> comes with preconfigured with a "kborg" account and your favorite
> emacs macros.

No, it more reminds me of a version of Sun OS back-when that was
exasperating me with what *I* thought were stupidities.  But those
around me who had mastered it didn't appreciate that it might be
possible to make it better, for it was a wonderfully flexible tool (it
was), a tool they had mastered.  Finally I had an airtight example:
The Shell Tool had an icon that was a picture of a little command line
and the Command Tool icon was a picture of a shell.  I pointed this
out.  The answer--delivered with a straight face: "You can configure
that."  Yes, but why should I have to? 

Well, stupidass that I am that I can't figure out how to use a
computer that isn't preconfigured with my prefered user name (BTW,
that is "kentborg", not "kborg"), I figure it is nice when tools are
already well suited for predictable uses.

Just because you know how to build tags out of a raw Subversion
install (and just because I have also managed to do the same--though I
am sure in a clunkier and inferior way to yours) doesn't mean that it
wouldn't be useful to some of us for a source code control system to
have tags as part of it, ready out of the box.

Just because you know might how to integrate an anti-spam tool into
some e-mail program doesn't mean there aren't people who would
appreciate not having to do that themselves.

Just because you might know how to get gtkpod to work doesn't mean
that Itunes* on a Mac isn't SO much nicer.

[* I hate fUNny CAPitiliZAtion and refuse to cooperate with Steve on

Just because you might know how to get an early Debian installer to do
what you want doesn't mean there isn't a place for Ubuntu.

Just because you might know how to configure Asterisk from scratch
doesn't mean that the simpler Asterisk at Home is wrong to exist.

Just because you know how to build something doesn't mean everyone
else should have to do so too.

Expecting a source code control system to come with the idea of "tags"
already being part of it is not unreasonable.  (After all, did we both
not add tags?)  And if the Subversion people want to build a more
general purpose versioned file system (as I think another poster
described it), one that excludes a tags feature, that is their right.
But don't get all upset if I wish for a tool (a source code control
system) that is already a little more pre-built for my workflow.

If I want an automatic transmission car (I don't, but say I did),
don't get upset.

> I'm sorry if I'm sounding snippy here, but I'm seeing a lot of FUD and
> misinformation in this thread.

I think I started out saying that someone looking at Subversion might
want to consider that it might be too elegant, that they might want a
more baroque tool that is specifically focused on source code control.
Calling svn elegant and not baroque is not an insult nor is it FUD.
Forgive me if I made any factual errors about Subversion.

Some people *should* buy a car with automatic transmission.  I prefer
a manual transmission, but I don't feel threatened that some choose

-kb, the Kent who figures he is allowed a little (constructive?)
flaming after it is implied he must be too dim witted to set up a
custom user name in Linux and so needs to find one preconfigured with
his name already in place.

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the Discuss mailing list