On 05/27/15 18:06, Andrew Fish wrote: > >> On May 27, 2015, at 1:52 AM, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com >> <mailto:ler...@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >>> >>> Also I’m a visual diff kind of person, so my brain >>> likes seeing the visual diff of the change, vs a command line diff. It >>> would be nice to have access to this on the web, vs. having to apply the >>> patch to branch manually. >> >> Access on the web looks like a step forward (eg. it provides syntax >> highlighting), but it's actually a small step at a steep price. The >> price is that a web browser (and a central server) are required. > > “Stone Knives and bearskins” aside, why is a web browser bad?
Ultimately, I can only say that I've found web apps very limiting when engaging in technical discussion. I find it hard to read code, arguments, and diagrams in today's web apps, and I also find it very difficult to present my ideas clearly. Web applications seem to optimize for ease of (thoughtless) expression, and they encourage social interaction rather than cultivating clarity of thought and structure. Most people don't think in structure (even in technical discussions -- I'm witnessing it all over technical fora), so they might not perceive the non-support for structure repressive. Personally I'm driven nuts by it. * Here's an example: how could I write a review like http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bios.tianocore.devel/3144/focus=3198 in a web application? (I'm referring to the tables and diagrams; please keep scrolling down.) I'd have to fight with HTML tags or markup all the time. In addition, how could I reference that review two years later, like I just did? How could I search my local, cross-referenced archive for said review, and find it in less than 60 seconds, like I just did? (I found the Message-Id locally, and gmane allows remote lookup by Message-Id.) * Another example: <https://bugs.launchpad.net/>. It's about the worst bug tracker ever. It optimizes for "nice" over "useful". Evidence: - It wants to prevent careless users from pasting text that is too wide, thereby disrupting the appearance of the website. So it inserts <wbr> tags into "overlong" words. Surprise, a full sized git commit hash qualifies as overlong, so it breaks it into three pieces with (invisible) <wbr> tags. The result is that double-click will not select the full hash, only a third of it. Plus, the commit hash could be wrapped if it was rendered near the end of a line, rather than forcing a new line. How counterproductive is that? - LP wants to prevent careless users from pasting overlong comments -- too many lines -- lest the appearance of the website be disrupted. So they truncate each comment after a certain length. If you want to read the full comment, you have to click a link, and then the comment is shown in isolation. So you are forced to choose between "reading elaborate comment in full" and "seeing elaborate comment in the context of other comments". How counterproductive is that? For example, how can you search the complete bug report (all comments at once) for a specific string, using your browser's built-in "search in page" function? Well, you can't. * Another example: the Mailman 3.0 web archive. I referenced the LWN article and my specific complaints earlier. It took a nose dive after 2.0. * Another example: the ArchLinux forum / topic about GPU passthrough to QEMU/KVM virtual machines, using VFIO, running OVMF + Windows, mainly. https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=162768 The topic is over 5200 posts, and it is presented as 200+ pages of 25 posts each. How counterproductive is that? It is completely unusable. The forum supports no threading (obviously), instead you see these box quotes embedded in box quotes embedded in box quotes. There is no support for searching, indexing, local mirroring. 5200 messages should be trivial to search! A standalone mailing list should have been created ages ago for this topic. 5200 messages are a ridiculously low amount for a mailing list to handle. Threading, mirroring, indexation, searching would come for free. The subject matter is supposed to be fairly technical. I commented a few times, only to grow a burning hate for the forum software in question. My concern is not rooted in a penchant for "Stone Knives and bearskins". I'm worried because all web apps seem to favor form over function, plus accessibility via (extremely limiting) mobile devices over carefully laid out arguments. Participation via handheld devices, and eye candy, are worthless for engineering discussions. The form of expression that they encourage *restricts* thoughtful exchange. > The git repository is a centralized server, and so is the website. The git repository supports "fetch commits" as a primary function. It can be mirrored all over the world. Once you update your local clone, the full power of your desktop (and the full project history) is at your service. The git repo doesn't centralize control, or workflow. I'm not sure what you mean by the website. If you mean the tianocore wiki, or the current mailing list archive (on sourceforge), they are indeed difficult to use. The wiki is hard to search (like most other wikis), and the SF web archive is a joke (searching, threading... I'm repeating myself). Ultimately, I can only speak of personal experience. If yours differs, I positively respect that. I just wouldn't like to see my productivity hampered. :( Thanks Laszlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
