Re: Is gnu.emacs.gnus dead?

[Emanuel Berg]

Hikaru Ichijyo <ichijyo@macross.sdf.jp> writes:

> One of the things I generally like about Unix
> software is that it's not always flashy, or even
> friendly to new users, but once you get it working,
> it stays working, almost forever. It's a forty year
> old platform based on keeping things simple and hard
> to break, even if that means it looks "old" to some
> people and it doesn't have fad appeal.

Well, "yes", "sometimes", and "no".

Yes: Unix software is robust, reliable, and powerful.

Sometimes: "friendly to new users" depends who them
new users are. When some of them come to Linux they
think it is great instantly because ls(1) and the
command-line options are much more friendly to them
than the GUIs the WIMPs are using...

("WIMP": coined 1980 - precursor of "GUI": "windows,
icons, menus, pointer" [1] - it is funny because it is
true...)

> For me, having little to say about a piece of
> software that's working very well is typical of Unix
> software. It just works, and there's not much more
> to say.

No: people have a lot to say about such simple tools -
for example, ls(1). My ls alias is

    "ls -GX --group-directories-first --color=auto -I \"*.meta\" -I \"#*#\""

and that isn't it by far. [2]

And one step up the creativity ladder, just G00gle for
relatively simple tools as sed, awk, and see what you
get (actually, what you see is what you get).

If people weren't talking about, configuring,
modifying, and adapting/expanding Gnus, that would be
a clear sign Gnus is done.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_(computing)
[2] http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/conf/.zsh/ls

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573