The CAB war, and the signs of the community immaturity

May 25th, 2007

I’ve only checked CAB at some point in 2005. It was kind clumsy but I understand that what they tried to achieve wasn’t easy, so it would be wrong to point finger unless I build something like it (in fact I did, in Java, in 2003, but that’s another story). And even if I do, it will be oriented to my projects’ requirements, not intended to be a general solution. So I’d rather stay away from this whole flame.

On the other hand I’ve used the data access block, and I like it and encourage people to use, depending on their scenarios. I dislike the configuration, and the need for a GUI for it, otherwise you wont grok it. Anyway, their choice.

Now Sam Gentile says, and I quote

On a side note, as I told Jeremy stop advocating Windsor/Castle when the last downloadable install release on the web site was Dec 2006. Yes, I can play with Subversion and all that good stuff but I have more important things to do like ship software

First, we have a build server so actually you don’t need to use the subversion as long as the build is passing. Second, I don’t think we need Sam Gentile’s blessing. If he cannot appreciate the complexity and the size of the subprojects under the Castle umbrella, then I prefer that he sticks to Enterprise Library. I can live with that.

And he continues:

I respect you, but frankly these kind of posts don’t endear you to me or others as they seem quite elitist and seem to advocate “you choose my way or you’re dumb” mentality. If you want me (and others) to keep reading, maybe you might want to think about this.

I think everyone has the right of having an opinion, and expressing it through their blog. If that makes people angry, they need to learn to deal with it, not the original poster.

Ayende did use a tone that I wouldn’t use to talk about CAB and Enterprise Library, but hey, it’s his blog. Jeremy, as usual, is being very didactic on his blog showing how he would create a CAB. I salute him! We should only hope that more people spend the time that these guys spend on their blogs to share knowledge (!).

But the bottom line here is the intensive reaction for nothing but some people saying that if they had to do [something], they would use [foo] instead of [bar]. [bar] users seem to have take into heart, and that’s never a wise thing to do. These kind of reaction demonstrates the immaturity of our community. Hopefully it will be something isolated, and we won’t end up as Java community that have so much to learn about what not to do regarding communities.

From now on I suggest using Ruby’s and Python’s (even Plone’s) community as an inspiration. And if someone blogged something that indirectly offended you, then do write a post in response. Call him/her names, do whatever you want. Just do not publish it.

Categories: General, OS | Top Of Page | 8 Comments » |

8 Responses to “The CAB war, and the signs of the community immaturity”

Sam Gentiile Says:

I just love posts like this

>First, we have a build server so actually you don’t need to use >the subversion as long as the build is passing.
Yah great so package it into a release once in a while so people can use it

>Second, I don’t think we need Sam Gentile’s blessing. If he cannot >appreciate the complexity and the size of the subprojects under >the Castle umbrella,
You said it was complex. I thought it was supposed to be a *less* complex than CAB

>then I prefer that he sticks to Enterprise Library. I can live >with that.
What is with EntLib for you and others? Did I ever say EntLib. EntLib != CAB.

hammett Says:

build server != release. But I’m not surprise you don’t know the difference.

About juggling with ‘complexity’ word, I’ll leave that unanswered. If you did more than a cursory look at the castle project, you’d know better.

Darius Damalakas Says:

!

The discussion is going definetely not the right way.

hammett, telling that “I’m not surprise you don’t know the difference” shows a lot of frustration from you. And bad attitude. And that’s very bad.

Castle should be a top project, worth it’s name (not a dungeon, o bazzar. But a Castle). It’s not possible that everybody will see it’s value. Even smart people sometimes can be contaminated with faith.

Sam, you also seem to have nothing important to say. No need to bite! :)

hammett Says:

Indeed Darius. What strikes is how a few people think it’s easy to manage and release a project of this size. Like we dont release it ‘coz we’re lazy…

Sam Gentile Says:

Look, this is going nowhere. You are making all sorts of bad comments that you know are untrue. You know from my blog that we have weekly Iterations, CI Builds, Subversion and that I know the difference. It doesn’t look great for you.

Why are you being like this? Don’t you want Castle to get the respect it deserves? Don’t you want more people to know about it? I think two of the barriers to more people using it are the packaging and the lack of documentation. Sure its great as is but if you want more people to use it these would help. There is no need to lash out at me when its people on CodeBetter that talk about Castle all the time.

Sam Gentile Says:
Steve Eichert Says:

Is CAB too complex, yet another opinion

Jack Welsh Says:

Hmmm! As long as we are all stating our opinions: In my opinion CAB is a very good performance enhancement tool for apps that do not go beyond a 2 server web farm. After that it starts getting messy due to its in-process, standalone nature. For more details on this, you can read http://www.alachisoft.com/ncache/caching-application-block_index.html

Leave a Reply