And the cruft goes on...

[Ralph Cohen]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 14:39:08 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:

>Friday, September 08, 2000, 2:20:45 PM, Ralph wrote:
>> Ahh, I see.  So, in other words, 'cruft' is in the eyes of the
>> beholder.<g>
>
>    I don't see it that way.  All things that I have defined as cruft I have
>also explained why they are either not needed or why they /are/ needed.  Eye
>of the beholder is "Well, just because."

That you may have explained your reasons for including or removing
various components from your MUA doesn't negate the fact that others
may see things differently.  For instance, what you may see as
unnecessary junk, such as an integrated editor, others may see as a
virtual necessity.  There have certainly been numerous discussions on
this list which have revealed very strong opinions on both sides of the
arguement.   Nevertheless, it is the developer's prerogative about what
to include or not to include and it is ultimately his or her vision
which is presented to the user.  Personally, I greatly value the
thought and consideration authors put into their designs and find that
as a user, I can be very easily convinced to re-catagorize a bug as a
feature instead if presented with well thought out reasoning.

Ralph

rpcohen@neurotron.com