Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • It sounds like you can't do things correctly, so you like to blame your problems on other people. You made a typo and got a bounce message which you ignored. Apparently you then forgot to include the patch with the next email.

    Still, you blame every one else.
    • For the record, I included the patch in that message. It's just that I still sent it again to the same address believing it was correct.

      And for the record, if I could not get something right, and had to consult people, and then the admins on something (and I'm very intelligent and computer savvy) then the blame is on the system. It's bad usabilty as I demonstrated.

      If I designed a program, and someone had a problem using it, and he asked me what to do, then I should first explain him how to do it, a

      • And for the record, if I could not get something right ... then the blame is on the system.

        Sometimes I try to pull doors clearly marked "Push", even if they have the proper type of affordances (that means appropriate door handles). I take from that lesson two possibilities. One, I could be a complete fool. Two, people sometimes make mistakes no matter how well designed things are.

        Maybe you can only insert your house key with the correct alignment, but that doesn't prevent you from cleaning your ear

        • And for the record, if I could not get something right ... then the blame is on the system.

          Sometimes I try to pull doors clearly marked "Push", even if they have the proper type of affordances (that means appropriate door handles). I take from that lesson two possibilities. One, I could be a complete fool. Two, people sometimes make mistakes no matter how well designed things are.

          Actually, Norman Walsh talks about that in "The Design of Everyday Things" [shlomifish.org]. He shows how some everyday objects have serious usability problems, and the signs of them don't help at that. So these doors are badly designed.

          I demonstrated two easily fixed things in which the parrot bug and patch submission process got it wrong:

          1. There wasn't a way to submit bugs from the bug tracker, not even a referral to a document that explains how. Yet, people expect it to be there, because that's normally the way to do it.

            So I had to ask the people on #parrot (twice) and they referred me to the document. But any such request ticket should also be fixed by permanently fixing the problem, as Joel says [joelonsoftware.com]

          2. The Parrot help page had the address, and a non-trivial one in obfuscated text, as people can mistake it with parrotbugs@parrot.org or whatever, instead of the more convenient click on a mailto: link.

          3. It will save a lot of time of the developers and webmasters into the future to fix these problems once and for all.

          • There wasn't a way to submit bugs from the bug tracker, not even a referral to a document that explains how.

            Completely wrong. See bugs6.perl.org [perl.org] as well as rt.perl.org [perl.org]. You said that you visited the latter.

            I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how people have the magic knowledge of the URL of the Parrot bug tracker such that they can type it from institutional memory without error without having to use a search engine or ask someone, yet are completely incapable of copying and pasting an e-mail