Apparently basic support for Windows is considered Somebody Else's Problem. This is easy to work around by using PortableGit instead, but I wonder how many more such Somebody Else's Problems are lurking in the shadows.
I think git has linux and web origins and since most environments attached to those two communities have solid git support Windows support has not been a priority (or, even those with Windows use some VM manager).
So two things: 1. as git gains traction in other areas, so too will its support on Windows 2. the social coding tools and features github offers will help #1 happen
I think there are always going to be unknown unknowns but in this case I wouldn't let them detract from what is otherwise a pretty impressive option that has a lot of upside and momentum.
My issue is with both the bug itself and the attitude of the developer.
The bug is that a file in a protected area is written to by non-elevated processes -- this would clearly never fly on Unix, nor should it on Windows. Not writing to protected areas is considered basic support for a platform in my book.
The dev's reaction is even worse -- saying that since he uses XP he doesn't see it and so he doesn't care about it is like an ostrich burying its head in the ground.
Should MSI and GPO support, to many people a baseline for basic Windows support (for security, portability and maintenance reasons), really be Somebody Else's Problem for Firefox?
Every large OS project has some basic stuff they don't care to touch...
/me shrugs. People who want MSI/GPO support are free to use IE instead of Firefox, just like people who want a DVCS that works on Windows are free to use Mercurial instead of Git.
7 comments:
I think git has linux and web origins and since most environments attached to those two communities have solid git support Windows support has not been a priority (or, even those with Windows use some VM manager).
So two things:
1. as git gains traction in other areas, so too will its support on Windows
2. the social coding tools and features github offers will help #1 happen
I think there are always going to be unknown unknowns but in this case I wouldn't let them detract from what is otherwise a pretty impressive option that has a lot of upside and momentum.
My issue is with both the bug itself and the attitude of the developer.
The bug is that a file in a protected area is written to by non-elevated processes -- this would clearly never fly on Unix, nor should it on Windows. Not writing to protected areas is considered basic support for a platform in my book.
The dev's reaction is even worse -- saying that since he uses XP he doesn't see it and so he doesn't care about it is like an ostrich burying its head in the ground.
Should MSI and GPO support, to many people a baseline for basic Windows support (for security, portability and maintenance reasons), really be Somebody Else's Problem for Firefox?
Every large OS project has some basic stuff they don't care to touch...
/me shrugs. People who want MSI/GPO support are free to use IE instead of Firefox, just like people who want a DVCS that works on Windows are free to use Mercurial instead of Git.
Yeah, but if we switch to git that option isn't a very viable one any more.
Unfortunately the Git community in general regards Windows as a second-class citizen.
Mercurial has a much better attitude in general.
Ask Linux users about "Somebody Else's problem" ;)
Post a Comment