When people are bike shedding, they aren't doing it to waste time, they think that they are adding value because of `list of bad results of wrong colour here`.
So here's my question to you: could you be wrong about this having "concrete effects on adoption"? And if you are wrong, is this just bike shedding?
And to continue the bike shed metaphor, it's about people ignoring nuclear power plant design whose worst case scenario is nuclear meltdown. For CockroachDB 1.0, what's the equivalent, data loss? So are you discussing something technically trivial (colour is easy to understand) over the design (technically complex) that would prevent data loss? If the answer is yes, aren't you bike shedding like a champion?
tl;dr Bike shedders don't know they're bike shedding and think the discussion is very important.
With respect to your specific point: if we could resolve how much it matters, then yes, that would obviate the debate. But the bikeshedding metaphor doesn't add much there because it's precisely in dispute about how much it matters.
Well know I feel like a bit like an asshole with how abrasive my response was, sorry. Kudos to you for not escalating.
I agree that it resolves to how much it matters, and I guess I disagree with you on how much it matters. How it relates to the bike shedding metaphor is starting to feel like a semantic argument, which is not something I want to continue.
In response to your escalated names like PubesDB... my opinion is that I agree I wouldn't work with them, not because of any internal disgust reaction, but because the name signals a level of maturity that I don't want in my stack. Some people might have the same reaction to Cockroaches.
>Well know I feel like a bit like an asshole with how abrasive my response was, sorry. Kudos to you for not escalating.
I didn't feel it was abrasive at all.
For my part, I'm just upset that I went to such great lengths (in the comment I linked) to unpack where the bikeshed metaphor does or doesn't apply, disentangling the various issues and merging them into a general understanding, right where that comment was needed, and yet that's the one that no one is responding to... (what's worse, it was downvoted less than a minute after I posted it ).
>In response to your escalated names like PubesDB... my opinion is that I agree I wouldn't work with them, not because of any internal disgust reaction, but because the name signals a level of maturity that I don't want in my stack. Some people might have the same reaction to Cockroaches.
Right, like I said, "we're haggling over the details"; it should be regarded as a question of which names are so disgusting to be out of the question, yet people are dismissing the entire naming issue as "lol emotional primates".
So here's my question to you: could you be wrong about this having "concrete effects on adoption"? And if you are wrong, is this just bike shedding?
And to continue the bike shed metaphor, it's about people ignoring nuclear power plant design whose worst case scenario is nuclear meltdown. For CockroachDB 1.0, what's the equivalent, data loss? So are you discussing something technically trivial (colour is easy to understand) over the design (technically complex) that would prevent data loss? If the answer is yes, aren't you bike shedding like a champion?
tl;dr Bike shedders don't know they're bike shedding and think the discussion is very important.