What specifically is uncalled for? I disagree with the design choices made in iTerm2 and wish the best of luck to the developer(s) behind it. I am not wishing any harm, but I do have to say that the input latency is annoying and attempting to resolve words in command output to see if they are hostnames is a dubious technical solution. Am I not allowed to voice my opinion on this?
It was an oversight that was promptly fixed after the issue was raised. The dev created a post-mortem [1] and a wiki [2] describing the issue.
Seriously, give the poor dev a rest. It's absolutely uncalled for to throw in a non-sequitur about some bug from 7 years ago, making snide remarks about how that's a "design choice."
Sure, it was an oversight. I am glad the issue was resolved swiftly, and I think George Nachman managed the issue well. But it is the existence of the bugs discussed in this thread that make me feel like not using iTerm2. I do not understand how can one not use past events as arguments in favor of not using a piece of software. I'm more than certain that George Nachman is a great developer developing great software, and I am not saying otherwise. I will however not cede that I do not wish to use iTerm2 because of the existence of the dns lookup bug in the first place, combined with the high input latency - I will not use software just because someone has put a lot of effort in it - I have to feel good about using it too :)
