Re: Eclipse bug?
- From: "Oliver Wong" <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:59:47 GMT
"Twisted" <twisted0n3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1152740474.345123.46930@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Oliver Wong wrote:> Maybe it's a bug that was fixed, and there's a second bug in the
> find-updates UI in the older version.
Would updating manually rather than automatically risk my data?
Your workspace will be fine. You may have problems with any installed plugins.
It makes support a lot easier if you're sure that the person you're
trying to provide support to is the same person throughought the
Anonymous: Your program crashes when I click on button "Foo".
Dev: I can't reproduce this problem.
Anonymous: It only happens when you have the "Bar" checkbox checked.
Dev: I still can't reproduce it. What version are you running?
Dev: That version doesn't even have a "Foo" button.
Anonymous: I know.
Dev: Then how can you possibly be clicking it?
Anonymous: I never said I clicked it.
Dev: You said it in the very first post of this thread!
Anonymous: That wasn't me. That was someone else.
Classic straw-man argument. Most of us here on usenet are not
*an*onymous, though often *pseud*onymous.
There's a difference between usenet and a company hosted bugtracker. On Usenet, if someone is trolling, you can just ignore them. With a bugtracker, as a developper, you can't ignore posts you "don't like". Also, trolling, spamming, etc. is directly wasting your companies resources. Thus targetted attacks against your company are possible, whereas on Usenet, the attacks are not directed at anything in particular. Newsservers can clear old postings when they run out of diskspace. Bugtrackers should keep the bugs archived ideally forever.
In other words, it doesn't make sense to say "Here's how usenet works, and so this is how bugtrackers should work." You say you don't want user registration. To me, that means going with anonimity, because it's less misleading that allowing people to choose their own pseudonyms. Like I said, with choosing pseudonyms, a troll could masquerade as the lead developer.
My desired e-mail address (e.g. owong@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
And that's it. I had a fully functioning passport account after those
Yeah, ten years ago. Just try it now -- www.hotmail.com, sign up, three
pages of forms, checkboxes, and Christ alone knows what else, and that
was several years ago. It's probably only gotten worse since then.
I did it yesterday, right before making the post. I'll do it again right now, with a detailed log of my steps.
(*) Load up firefox, type in the google search bar ".net passport"
(*) Click on the first link which takes me to https://accountservices.passport.net/ppnetworkhome.srf?vv=400&lc=1033
(*) Scroll down to "Sign up for a limited account".
(*) Click on "Get started now"
(*) Type in a username. I chose "ahgdjhgfs".
(*) Type in a password. I chose "123456".
(*) Retype password. Again, "123456".
(*) do the CAPTCHA test. In my case, it was "CCD2TE38"
(*) Click "continue"
(*) I'm supposed to retype in the e-mail to confirm that I agree to the terms of usage. Instead, I selected it from the page and copy and pasted it. ahgdjhgfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
(*) Click on "I accept".
You've created credentials
You can now sign in using ahgdjhgfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Remember that you can't send or receive mail using this e-mail address.
To me, that was extremely easy. Please let me know where you get your homeowner's insurance. If it's easier than this, I'll sign up right away.
> And all that data no doubt shared with all parner
> sites that use that as a logon. Multiply the privacy
> invasion/ChoicePoint-like leak risk by a factor of a few thousand for a
> true universal logon.
I don't mind the above info getting leaked.
Speak for yourself.
I did. The "I" in the "I don't mind the above info getting leaked" was the first person singular.
Plenty of people do. Especially those that
understand the risks better. www.gripe2ed.com has privacy as well as
other issues discussed, in connection with (mainly) IT vendor
(mis)behavior. ChoicePoint rated a full article some years back.
Note that the above info is "ahgdjhgfs" and "123456". I've leaked it. It's not a big deal. I don't care about that account at all. It's trivial. It doesn't even contain my e-mail address. What possible risk could there be?
BugTrackers implement a few feature above and beyond newsgroups though.
For example, they track who the bug is assigned to, what dependencies on
other bugs this bug has. They can be integrated with CVS and JUnit, etc.
That's fascinating, but entirely beside the point, which concerns users
giving feedback to developers, not how the developers internally keep
track of stuff later on.
You say "*THE* point" as if everyone universally agrees with you what your concept of the point is. But from my perspective, you're the one missing "the" point. "The" point, to me, is that you're freely posting your e-mail on usenet, but refusing to submit your e-mail to the Eclipse development team out of fear of spam, is irrational.
All I'm saying is that for someone in your specific situation[snip]
My specific situation is not relevant to the main point, which is that
expecting ALL users to register for ALL software, separately, is just
asking for it, and that expecting them to do so only for YOUR software
is blithe arrogance and selfishness.
This is not "the point" I am trying to discuss with you.
So best to expect them to register
for NO software, right?
No. See my other post about false dichotomy, etc.
I don't think Eclipse is interested in censoring you. I don't think
there's a conspiracy to cover up past bugs that Eclipse had so that it
appeared that Eclipse was miraculously bug free from inception.
A specific case does not change the generic argument, where the
possibility of censorship remains a concern to users and developers
Again, I'm not talking about users or developers in general. I'm talking about YOU. Your behaviour with respect to Eclipse's bugtracker doesn't make sense to me. That's what the main point I'm trying to convey.
You're saying "Since I don't want to register my copy of BonziBuddy for
fear of spam, to be fair to all software vendors all over the world, I will
never register any software, ever." I'm saying that's silly.
Actually, I'm saying that software vendors cannot reasonably expect me
to register for ALL the software I use, and expecting me to register
just for THEIR particular bit of software is unfair -- to me and to
other software vendors.
It means "MY software is so much more important than ANYthing else you
will EVER use that I feel I have the right to impose *special* demands
on bug submitters, ones it would be unreasonable to expect you to
fulfill for all the software you use". This is not a message any
software vendor should send -- least of all an open source one...
What's the point of being "fair" to other software vendors? Why do you think it's unfair to them for you to selective register software with vendors you like, and to not register with vendors you don't like? Have you ever given a gift or done a favor to someone? Have you given a gift and/or done a favor for everyone in the entire world? If yes to the former, and no the latter, would you say you were being "unfair"?
- Re: Eclipse bug?
- From: Twisted
- Re: Eclipse bug?
- Prev by Date: Re: Applet and HttpOnly cookies in IE 6.0 SP1
- Next by Date: Re: how i will open (from Java Application) the MS word format /html documentsin repective Applications in Linux OS?
- Previous by thread: Re: Eclipse bug?
- Next by thread: Re: Eclipse bug?