JosefAssad

Missing option: none.

Whatsapp's value to me was negligible (that isn't to say I wasn't using it quite a lot; it's value was just low).

So I'm removing it and not replacing it.

Well, don't leave us hanging. You omitted the [0] link preceding the Church of Bitcoin link!

I remember when we used to write code and alt tab into a game while it compiled.

How the world has changed!

I also have a low opinion of jira, but I don't agree with this list at all. I refuse to use jira because it is over-engineered and is generally used as a crowbar to foist non-technical influence upon technical teams, at least in the sites I've seen. Jira is in my opinion a fatal source of friction to the production of reasonable software.

That's not what I'm getting from this list.

Worse, almost all of the points (all maybe? Haven't checked) declare that something is "missing".

Please god no.

Jira isn't missing more features. When you make a list like this, some product manager at Atlassian is going to turn it into a bunch of scrum epics and jira will be even worse in 12 months.

Well, not explicitly. But you can respond with a set-cookie header for the same session id, with an expiry in the past. Browsers will purge expired cookies.

If you flip that around, it's possible that being driven by one man was a contributing factor to redis' success.

Design by committee and all that.

I was having problems loading it. The google cached version worked for me when I clicked for the text only version:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9juIKtY...

Is there a reason you prefer that rather than having something like

  *.py[cod]

in your .gitignore?

Do people really use find like that to clean up source code?

  git clean -fxdn  # review what would be deleted, then

  git clean -fxd

I've observed something not too different. I suspect it might be that I and my users are at different levels of zoom with respect to the product.

They really don't think about it at all except for when they need to get specific tasks done that the product does well. They are max zoomed out.

I necessarily am zoomed in to the entire product, from every lowly line of code all the way up to the aggregate product. I am max zoomed in.

This leads to a sense of alienation when I observe the relationship between my users and my product. Sometimes it's simpler to think that I actually don't know my own product, so different is the perspective.

Really it's a matter of how much the product occupies in my mind versus theirs; they are using it opportunistically and would prefer to spend as little time as possible thinking about it. Which I suppose is a good argument against over-engineering; for a mass market product, core features beyond the third will only be used by the developers.

Anyhow, all that is to say I can understand your comment, and I often think that I'm lucky the emacs developers or GvR don't look over my shoulder when I use their software because they would give their cats Nobel prizes. :)