I agree with Lynn. Can we stop the rant and get back to development. If anyone has this big of a complaint with TuCows policy, please take it off the developers list and directly to TuCows.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lynn W. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 10:02 PM Subject: RE: XML WEB SERVICES - New Thread > John, > > It's not just you. > > This probably isn't 100% true, but in the past six months it seems that the bulk of the traffic on this list can be divided into one of two categories. > > 1) How TUCOWS is doomed to failure because they didn't do (straight html/xml/soap/.net/xws/etc.). > > 2) How TUCOWS does not fix bugs or document protocols. > > Back in the day, this list was about getting things done and making things work. Some of the Windows folks bitched incessantly about how PERL wasn't usable on NT/2K, while others pitched in and worked through the problems. Others have produced ActiveX components that encapsulate the protocol or posted a cook "hack" that someone could use. > > The people on this list don't seem to be doing that anymore. > > You're right, I don't know XWS. I haven't had a need for it. If we were starting today, and the answer was XWS, I'd go learn it. I assume it's easy (at least in your opinion) so it wouldn't be hard. I just don't have a project that has that need right now. > > But if you think I'm arguing against XWS from ignorance, then you missed my meaning entirely. > > I've never argued against any of the "other, better" protocols because it really isn't that relevant. Ultimately, the existing protocol works or OpenSRS wouldn't need 8 digit order numbers. > > If we are developers, and we think of ourselves as professionals, then we should be spending our time developing, and not constantly bitching because the other guy didn't do it the way you would have done it. > > .. because the other guy always does it the wrong way, and no amount of bitching will ever change that. > > -- Lynn > > On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:26:57 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > We'll you'd think after 3 decades you would have outgrown personal attacks. > > How many of those decades are actually useful now? > > > > I argue hard for free market capitalism , federalism and liberty. Does that mean I don't understand socialism, fascism and statism? > > > > In what way was your post a "technical issue"? Maybe XWS is the __one__ technology _you_dont_understand. But I would not be so rude as to post that to a list. > > > > Take your last shot - I'm done with this thread. > > > > John Roche > > einfosystems.net > > Microsoft Certified Partner > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lynn W. Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 6:31 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: XML WEB SERVICES - New Thread > > > > I've been coding for three decades, and there is only reason I can see for someone to argue this hard for a specific technology: > > > > It is the __one__ technology they understand. > > > > I'm here for the technical content. If we aren't going to discuss technical issues, please let me know. The constant griping of late isn't technical. > > > > On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:08:51 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Sorry, I can't resist saying XML WEB SERVICES at the drop of a hat. It doesn't seem to do any good, though. > >> > >> What is louder than ALL CAPS? ALL CAPS ITALICS BOLD? > >> > >> Anybody in Tucowsland listening? Even a 'not in your lifetime' is better than deafening silence. > >> Can anybody get a response from the "Technical Community Development Coordinator"? I guess yelling XML WEB SERVICES all the time gets you on the "Do Not Reply" list or it has been added to a SPAM filter... > >> > >> > >> John Roche > >> einfosystems.net > >> > >> PLEASE stay on topic. > >> > >> This is not about XML web interfaces > >> > >> This mail was content checked for malicious code and viruses by > >> GFI MailSecurity. GFI MailSecurity provides email content checking, > >> exploit detection and anti-virus for Exchange & SMTP servers. Email > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information. > > > > > > This mail was content checked for malicious code and viruses by > > GFI MailSecurity. GFI MailSecurity provides email content checking, > > exploit detection and anti-virus for Exchange & SMTP servers. Email > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information. > >
