Verification:
* Install with the defaults (just "click through")
* Go to the command line, and start ruby (type "ruby" then [ENTER]
* Go to the explorer and create this file "test.rb" with content "puts
'hi'", double click this file
Both will not work.
.
···
On 11 Ιούν, 20:47, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
On 11 Éïýí, 20:30, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> > wrote:
> 2011/6/11 Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com>:
> > Back to topic: please ask some product manager that you trust about
> > the basic installer requirement that I've mentioned (it's not my
> > requirement, but a general one).
> Here is a quote from Microsoft's UX design guidelines:
> "Don't force users to opt out of installing optional features. Allow
> them to opt in instead. For example, users should explicitly choose to
> install a Windows Desktop Gadget."
> Source:Microsoft Learn: Build skills that open doors in your career
This subjects "optional features".
The basic requirement I've mentioned subjects "necessary setup actions
to make product operative".
--
http://lazaridis.com
These are all good points, but has anyone really been far even as
decided to use even go want to do look more like?
···
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 03:40:30AM +0900, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
On 12 Ιούν, 19:39, Luis Lavena <luislav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 1:29 pm, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
> > Back to topic: please ask some product manager that you trust about
> > the basic installer requirement that I've mentioned (it's not my
> > requirement, but a general one).
>
> Microsoft Learn: Build skills that open doors in your career
>
> "Another reason to streamline setup is that inexperienced users
[...]
This just confirms: leave the boxes checked, or get rid of them (maybe
detect if there are already associations or path variables, and
confront the user only then).
> Anyhow, seem your level of expertise in fields from OO, embedded
[...]
What you call "criticism" is basically detecting issues like
weaknesses, flaws, barriers, inconsistencies, defects.
This is my main expertise, or an inborn talent and tendency (or even a
"curse").
If spotting the issues leads to change, then this is a constructive
criticism, a contribution.
If I make additionally implementation / architectural suggestions,
then it's design work.
If there is much change-resistance (e.g. from the typical "freak-
show", the self-declared "community police" or simply by one crazy-
gone individual who writes publicly when he's under drugs), then it
becomes hard work.
Each issue needs an (estimated) average of 2 days mental attention
until it is solved in the language repository (where it benefits all).
Saying that this is no contribution at all is simply ungrateful and
insincere.
--
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/
Would you hire someone without seeing a line of code from them?
Of course, you don't have to do anything at all, a priori. You can go right on
making suggestions, demands, and "detecting issues" without providing code,
and we can go right on assuming you're an Abstract Candidate until you
demonstrate otherwise.
···
On Sunday, June 12, 2011 01:40:30 PM Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
On 12 Ιούν, 19:39, Luis Lavena <luislav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is RubyInstaller repository:
> GitHub - oneclick/rubyinstaller: RubyInstaller for Windows - Build recipes
I don't have to prove my technical skills. The people that I'm
interested in, detect my abilities just from my writings - they don't
need to see a line of code.
More to the point, you can use libraries without rubygems.
···
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 03:01:17AM +0900, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
2011/6/11 Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@lazaridis.com>:
>
> This subjects "optional features".
>
> The basic requirement I've mentioned subjects "necessary setup actions
> to make product operative".
So, the RubyInstaller doesn't actually install Ruby and its
dependencies? That's *all* that a setup package is required to do.
File association and path changing are very much optional, since Ruby
will work without those.
--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
[...] - (he just don't get it that I don't take his kind serious)
Topic closed.
Dismissed!
.
···
On 13 Ιούν, 01:15, David Masover <ni...@slaphack.com> wrote:
--
http://lazaridis.com
Of course it's obvious, and as an (obvious) conclusion you previous
statement becomes false.
"File association and path changing are very much optional, since
Ruby
will work without those. "
But what becomes even more obvious is, that I'm loosing my time with
you.
I'm sure that the relevant people will realize that in context
"newcomer", both options should be enabled by default.
Topic closed.
.
···
On 12 Ιούν, 13:38, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
> Verification:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CaptainObvious
--
http://lazaridis.com
> > Verification:
> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CaptainObvious
Of course it's obvious, and as an (obvious) conclusion you previous
statement becomes false.
"File association and path changing are very much optional, since
Ruby
will work without those. "
Ruby working is contingent neither on double-clicking nor on being in the
system path. For this to be false, you would have to demonstrate that actually
launching Ruby via a full path on the commandline does not work. I don't have
a Windows machine, but I assume that
C:\path\to\rubyw.exe myscript.rb
does, in fact, work. I imagine you could also create batch files, or even
plain Windows shortcuts, which launch Ruby scripts.
I'm sure that the relevant people will realize that in context
"newcomer", both options should be enabled by default.
If a "newcomer" is blindly installing software without reading and
understanding options like these, perhaps programming isn't likely to be a
strong suit for them?
Topic closed.
That's not up to you.
···
On Sunday, June 12, 2011 07:00:32 AM Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
On 12 Ιούν, 13:38, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> > > wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
Who are the relevant people? Luis Lavena, who is the RubyInstaller
maintainer, seems to be the most relevant person possible, and clearly
disagrees with you (and note that the position taken by RubyInstaller
was a considered change from the One-Click Installer.)
···
2011/6/12 Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@lazaridis.com>:
I'm sure that the relevant people will realize that in context
"newcomer", both options should be enabled by default.