RE: [xml] Bug or User Error
- From: Ron Ohmer <rohmer aisconsulting net>
- To: <veillard redhat com>, "Christopher J. Grayce" <cgrayce aleks com>
- Cc: <xml gnome org>
- Subject: RE: [xml] Bug or User Error
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 08:43:08 -0500
You should do none of the above...
I think I say this for everyone, we are all greatful for what you do. I personaly got a little miffed (Most likely not justified) when I simply asked a question, looking to see if anyone had seen what I had currently before with LibXML. I am sure it is an error on my part. But then you ripped into me.
The documentation needs a little organization, but you are only one man. Maybe the people (Myself included) that benifit from LibXML should contribute to your effort, and submit it to you for approval.
I don't know Christopher, but I don't believe he was trying to be nasty, or condescending. I think he was just trying to be helpful.
I apologize for getting this all off topic, and I am sure the everyone has better things to do. I just saw this (With my Subject line, I might add) descending into a "stone throwing" party. That was never my intent, and I am sure no one elses.
Ron
From: Daniel Veillard
Sent: Fri 1/30/2004 05:22
To: Christopher J. Grayce
Cc: Ron Ohmer; xml gnome org
Subject: Re: [xml] Bug or User Error
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:28:50AM -0800, Christopher J. Grayce wrote:
> With all due respect, Daniel, I kind of agree with some of this. I've
> been using libxml2 for quite a while, and I've done my best to study
> the documentation, the tutorials, the mailing list archive, and I've
> pored over the source code myself, walked through it with the debugger
> step by step, et cetera, and I *still* get snagged by features or
> "features" which, no doubt, are clear to you when you built them,
> but which catch me by surprise.
>
> I'm not a fool, either. I've been writing large production scientific
> code for 18 years, all on Multics/Unix/Linux systems and generally with
> open software and GNU tools.
>
> Unfortunately, the documentation for libxml2 is just not especially
> well-organized and decidedly incomplete. I'm not complaining about
> that -- you've done great work on the library itself, it *is* an
> open-source project, and anyone who doesn't like it is free to do a
> better job.
>
> But -- it's a little often the case that you yell at people for being
> dumbheads and not reading the docs, etc. -- a little too often, IMHO.
> You don't have to be an especial dumbhead to be puzzled or surprised
> by libxml2, for reasons above. It may be that the people who are writing
> to the list are not quite as dumb or lazy as you may be assuming. And
> in any event, we all ask dumbass newbie questions from time to time. It's
> not unreasonable to hope that, therefore, when it's our turn to be the
> expert, we're a little patient with those just get starting.
>
> I'm not trying to be a jerk or unappreciative of all you've done, and
> I know very well what it's like to be frustrated in the way you are.
> Just some feedback, is all, perhaps food for thought.
So tell me. What should I do ?
- Quit my job, loose my earnings and try to fullfill all the request
to the lists 24 hours a day ?
- Quit my job, loose my earnings and try to write a book about libxml2
which anyway won't give me enough revenues to even feed me.
- Just ignore requests ?
- anything else constructive ?
If I get really annoyed, it is because I care about this. Otherwise I would
just ignore posts, right ?
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]