5 ms·

I keep seeing this statement but this absolutely does not apply to everybody. How often can you just install fish or use other programming language instead of

by h1d 8y ago

I keep seeing this statement but this absolutely does not apply to everybody. How often can you just install fish or use other programming language instead of being forced to use bash? It's sad people keep using the default just because of being afraid that the next system you touch might not have it and you waste tremendous amount of productivity without using something better. I know a guy who used vim with default config for that reason. Utterly nonsense.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
znpy 8y ago
No one ever thinks of interoperability between people. Bash is known, to a variable depth, by pretty much every sysadmin (and a big part of being a sysadmin is being able to write shell scripts). So I might prefer the fish, and who came before me might have had a preference for zsh. So now I have to deal with three different shells: bash (default), fish (for the scripts i'll be writing from now on) and zsh (because of compatibility). Congrats. > I know a guy who used vim with default config for that reason. Utterly nonsense. I started using less and less emacs/vi(m) customization and learn more and more of the defaults for the same reason: whenever I log on a client system I am instantly proficient with the editor without stupid complaints like "but on my box is different..." . Anecdotal: I have seen people losing their editing speed/proficiency because all of a sudden they were in a clean vim session and had no one of their shiny and colorful plugins.
- h1d 8y ago
  Why can you not modify the editor environment that you use often? Hard to see I need to deal with environments where I can do nothing but keep the default every time I use it. Once you get the speed that is tuned to your liking, the default sounds like you're walking with legs strapped.
  - znpy 8y ago
    > Why can you not modify the editor environment that you use often? Because I am not the only one accessing those environments (please note the plural here). Currently there are about 13 other sysadmins in my team and we manage clients infrastructures among other things (managed services). From time to time someone from another team accesses those environment (not a sysadmin, but still familiar with the bash shell). Sometimes the client accesses those systems (rare, we try to discourage and avoid that). Can you even imagine what a mess it would be if we all started applying our own favorite settings ? (edit: fix grammar)
    - h1d 8y ago
      How hard is it to create a user for each of the system admins? It seems it's not a good practice to share a single account as it makes it hard to tell who did what.

by h1d 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

znpy 8y ago

No one ever thinks of interoperability between people. Bash is known, to a variable depth, by pretty much every sysadmin (and a big part of being a sysadmin is being able to write shell scripts). So I might prefer the fish, and who came before me might have had a preference for zsh. So now I have to deal with three different shells: bash (default), fish (for the scripts i'll be writing from now on) and zsh (because of compatibility). Congrats. > I know a guy who used vim with default config for that reason. Utterly nonsense. I started using less and less emacs/vi(m) customization and learn more and more of the defaults for the same reason: whenever I log on a client system I am instantly proficient with the editor without stupid complaints like "but on my box is different..." . Anecdotal: I have seen people losing their editing speed/proficiency because all of a sudden they were in a clean vim session and had no one of their shiny and colorful plugins.

h1d 8y ago
Why can you not modify the editor environment that you use often? Hard to see I need to deal with environments where I can do nothing but keep the default every time I use it. Once you get the speed that is tuned to your liking, the default sounds like you're walking with legs strapped.
- znpy 8y ago
  > Why can you not modify the editor environment that you use often? Because I am not the only one accessing those environments (please note the plural here). Currently there are about 13 other sysadmins in my team and we manage clients infrastructures among other things (managed services). From time to time someone from another team accesses those environment (not a sysadmin, but still familiar with the bash shell). Sometimes the client accesses those systems (rare, we try to discourage and avoid that). Can you even imagine what a mess it would be if we all started applying our own favorite settings ? (edit: fix grammar)
  - h1d 8y ago
    How hard is it to create a user for each of the system admins? It seems it's not a good practice to share a single account as it makes it hard to tell who did what.