FW: OT: broken/useless ansi - console driver??

[John Esak]

Incidentally, and by the way... did you think what I meant by "client" was
some kind of a customer??  :-)  Yeesh, I thought I clearly meant that he is
writing "server" software and has connected to it all manner of clients on
various alternate logins, laptops, desktops, etc., all for the purpose of
testing and re-testing the thing he is writing... Perhaps, this is why you
called it a Production machine. :-)  Like I say, Yeesh.  Words are never
enough to get across one's complete meaning, eh?

John


> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com]On
> Behalf Of John Esak
> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 7:39 PM
> To: Fplist (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: FW: OT: broken/useless ansi - console driver??
>
>
> I think you've lost me on this one... I have no idea what you are talking
> about. Production machine??  This is a developer who is writing
> new code on
> a development machine... and various connected via tcp/ip
> outlying clients.
> How do you develop if not by compiling and re-compiling and trying the new
> binary... over and over until it all works?  It's the way I do it. I don't
> know any other way. :-)
>
> John
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> > [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com]On Behalf Of Fairlight
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:28 PM
> > To: Fplist (E-mail)
> > Subject: Re: FW: OT: broken/useless ansi - console driver??
> >
> >
> > This public service announcement was brought to you by John Esak:
> > > You all got a mistaken impression. Dave is/was not talking
> > about his install
> > > programs, maybe I brought that in. He is working on coding an
> > app... it has
> > > to be recompiled and tried again. Instead of being able to just
> > copy the new
> > > binaries and everything over from his workspace to the testing
> > machine...
> > > and getting an error about text file busy because one of the
> > many clients he
> > > has working, perhaps a desktop, perhaps a laptop somewhere,
> > perhaps several
> > > alternate logins, etc., it now just happily copies the binary and the
> > > working clients crash out. What was simple before, now becomes
> > a hassle....
> > > different... whatever you want to say. I am the one who thinks it is
> >
> > That doesn't sound like a "test" machine to me.  Something I
> > refrained from
> > commenting on in the original when it was first posted, but it sounds at
> > least semi-production.  And I personally wouldn't want to
> > code/debug/compile/install time after time onto even a semi-production
> > machine.  Sounds odd for a developer to be doing that, but maybe it just
> > sounds worse than it is, taken out of fuller context that isn't
> > my business.
> > My first thought when this was brought in as an example was,
> > "Yeah, but you
> > shouldn't be doing -that- anyway."
> >
> > I agree the problematic behaviour is an issue, no matter why one
> > encounters
> > it, however.  It's absurd, in fact.
> >
> > > faster file system would appease everyone. Not me. It's kind of
> > a bait and
> > > switch to do these kinds of *major* changes without ANY
> > indication that they
> > > are there.
> >
> > There's -some- indication--the major number changed after damned near a
> > decade of stagnation.  I don't think one can actually say there's -no-
> > indication that something changes when the major changed.
> Whether or not
> > the "flagship" name should have been changed is going to be a matter of
> > contention, probably.  Sounds like they should have, but I don't have a
> > firm opinion, not having used it myself, and having only heard related
> > horror stories.  I think the only two people for whom I've heard it went
> > smoothly were JPR and Bob.
> >
> > On the flip side, when fP 6.0 comes out I'm sure there will be many that
> > feel it would be more appropriately labelled 5.0.16 rather than 6.0, for
> > lack of new progressive features, and additions for things that
> > should have
> > been there over half a decade ago (UNC's come to mind).
> >
> > > P.S. - A dead simple and very close analogy would be if filePro's next
> > > version just blithely overwrote locked records with new data... would
> > > everyone say... oh, that's just the new Unixware way of things,
> > get used to
> > > it. Ridiculous.
> >
> > I can think of a few almost-unthinking loyalists that might.
> Nobody whose
> > opinion I'd trust, however.
> >
> > I agree, ridiculous.
> >
> > mark->
> > _______________________________________________
> > Filepro-list mailing list
> > Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list