Re: vars naming scheme concerns
[=- Rado wrote on Sat 3.Jun'06 at 12:33:42 +0200 -=]
> Let's break this down even a little bit further.
> {...}
> Remains the "rest": those who always cry first before thinking
> about it, but once the heat is over, quickly forget about it and
> return to everyday joy of life with mutt.
Oh, I'm very sorry and seriously apologize for being unfair to
this "rest" group.
Sure, there is this small number of unprovoked sufferers by
_luckily_ not using "alternates" or "envelope_from", and some of
which won't stop crying about it.
According to this quote (to which I agree):
"Lots of users ARE idiots,
and also lots of users ARE NOT idiots."
many of this _small_ "rest" group, who have the right to cry about
a change they didn't provoke, actually can and _will_ accept the
pain accompanying it, if it
- serves a good reason (which it does), and
- is introduced in an as painless as possible way (which it will
be by the help of the script and widespread announcement campaign
with the help of package maintainers and news media, think 2.0).
Now the comparably small number of the "rest" gets even smaller by
those who'll support it despite the unprovoked pain.
After we've finally broken and pinned it down, please let's know
how many
- _unmaintained_ docs sites, and/ or
- of a _really small_ group of even though rightfully (because
lucky not using the 2 vars), but nevertheless
_unreasonably_ still crying users (considering the help
they'll be getting)
for a _one-time_(!!!) change does it _rationally_ take to block a
_lasting_ "good idea" (quote: tlr)?
--
© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
Even if it seems insignificant, in fact EVERY effort counts
for a shared task, at least to show your deserving attitude.