Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:37:17 -0700 (PDT) From: James Phillips <anti_spam256@yahoo.ca> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: I hate to bitch but bitch I must Message-ID: <47491.48249.qm@web65506.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20091017223503.B774C10656D3@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:07:25 -0400 > From: PJ <af.gourmet@videotron.ca> > Subject: Re: I hate to bitch but bitch I must > To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> > Cc: Steve Bertrand <steve@ibctech.ca>, > "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" > <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> > Message-ID: <4ADA23FD.8020003@videotron.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Polytropon wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:29:04 -0400, PJ <af.gourmet@videotron.ca> > wrote: > > > >> It is simple to understand Emglish but not so > simple what was meant by > >> whoever wrote it...I cannot correct something that > I do not uderstand... > >> come on, man, that should be easy to understand. > >> > > > > As English is not my native language, I *now* > understand the > > meaning of "it should"; in this case, it seems to mean > something > > like "basically, it is supposed to, but in this case, > it does > > not", regarding the desired action. > > > To be as precise as possible, it means normally it should > work so go > ahead; then the question is - what do you mean by > normally. You made the blunder of using the word "should" in your definition of "should" :) > In our case above, the instructions were to do the > operation with the > disk not in use and the os in SUM. That's very clear. Now, > I f they > wanted to point out a bug, the bug means that there is an > anomaly under > certain circumstances - and in this case there really is no > bug as it is > very clear as to how the instructions should be used. If > they consider > the operation under a live files system a bug, then they > should just > make a warning and say something along the lines of "do not > use on live > system as that may destroy data" or something to that > effect. As others have mentioned, context is important. Somebody even suggested a re-wording dropping the word "should." If there was a risk of data-loss, (somebody noted the program refuses to touch a live filesystem,) the bugs section would have read something more like: (Program) SHOULD NOT try writing to a live file-system. That is to say, the word "should" in a "Bugs" section implies a wish-list item. Meaning: it is technically possible, but the maintainers have not done the necessary (possibly tedious) work yet. Regards, James Phillips __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47491.48249.qm>