David Ross wrote:
And i must say i don't understand your attitude, you are fighting against other commercial projects but always tell us that you write
your own commerical programs/widgets. Do you really think that
this fits together.yes, the reason for it is that is becuase there are infinite
possibilities of "me"
Which means that you're changing your opinion as fitting? You're preaching water and drinking wine?
Regards,
Florian Gross
Mark Hubbart wrote:
I think I speak for more users than myself when I say that FireFox and Thunderbird are *not* Mac apps. Yes, they do pretty good, but they need to go a a bit further before they will be able to compete with the other mac web browsers, IMHO. My main gripe is that, even after the major changes they made to make it more mac-like, they still behave strangely. There a only a couple places left where there are major deviations from the usual mac app, but there are many items that behave almost, but not quite, like what you would expect. I think that this is especially a problem for more advanced users, since they are more likely to notice the differences.
Honestly, if you ask me, the biggest problem with firefox/thunderbird is speed. The interfaces for firefox and thunderbird are pretty sluggish, and scrolling under firefox has a really strange feel to it, like it's really really lagged.
However, the original point was valid. Mozilla's XUL interface has come a long way, and while it still needs a ton of optimization and a few more behavioral tweaks on OSX, it really has worked out quite well otherwise as a cross-platform GUI toolkit. It has a native feel on linux and windows and a very close to native feel on OSX.
Unfortunately, I don't think it's quite able to be used as a standalone gui toolkit (Though, it could very well be. After all, thunderbird does use it), but I really haven't done much reading on the subject.
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
Nicholas Van Weerdenburg wrote:
Well put.
I for one appreciate your insight and well-balanced comments and would feel poorer if you didn't keep them up.
Nick
Yeah, I haven't really seen Lothar post anything that I would consider trolling, And I agree with him on quite a few points.
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
It's amazing to see how much one bad apple can spoil the barrel.
David, one of the many differences between you and Lothar is that when
Lothar disagrees with someone, he can discuss it civilly without
resorting to ad hominem attacks or four-letter words. And he is not
presumptuous enough to assume that, just because someone disagrees
with him, they are either insane or hopelessly stupid. He also does
not assume that, if someone says something erroneous about his
software, they did it with malicious "trollish" intent. In other
words, he is a nice guy. Please try to learn something from him.
mm yes, I should have picked my words better, thanks
--David Ross
--- Rando Christensen <eyez@illuzionz.org> wrote:
David Ross wrote:
> actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to
the
> libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread.
Please
> read more.No. (L)GPL requires that you provide any modified
source to whoever you
distribute the binaries to, not to the original
author. If you're not
redistributing it (for example, if you're using it
internally in your
company), this is not required.--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Mmm. You're both wrong, in that Rando's statement is incomplete. The
LGPL also requires that one provide a relinkable target for statically
linked binaries. That is, one must deliver the .lib files as well as
the .exe so that the person who then wants to further modify the
LGPLed library may then relink their modified version of the library
with yours.
-austin
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 09:39:06 +0900, Rando Christensen <eyez@illuzionz.org> wrote:
David Ross wrote:
> actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to the
> libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread. Please
> read more.
No. (L)GPL requires that you provide any modified source to whoever you
distribute the binaries to, not to the original author. If you're not
redistributing it (for example, if you're using it internally in your
company), this is not required.
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
It's amazing to see how much one bad apple can spoil
the barrel.
David, one of the many differences between you and
Lothar is that when
Lothar disagrees with someone, he can discuss it
civilly without
resorting to ad hominem attacks or four-letter
words. And he is not
presumptuous enough to assume that, just because
someone disagrees
with him, they are either insane or hopelessly
stupid. He also does
not assume that, if someone says something erroneous
about his
software, they did it with malicious "trollish"
intent. In other
words, he is a nice guy. Please try to learn
something from him.
Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and tell
disgusting lies about software. The best skill I would
ever be able to have. --David Ross
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
I rehashed in other email --David Ross
--- Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 09:39:06 +0900, Rando Christensen > <eyez@illuzionz.org> wrote:
> David Ross wrote:
> > actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to
the
> > libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread.
Please
> > read more.
> No. (L)GPL requires that you provide any modified
source to whoever you
> distribute the binaries to, not to the original
author. If you're not
> redistributing it (for example, if you're using it
internally in your
> company), this is not required.Mmm. You're both wrong, in that Rando's statement is
incomplete. The
LGPL also requires that one provide a relinkable
target for statically
linked binaries. That is, one must deliver the .lib
files as well as
the .exe so that the person who then wants to
further modify the
LGPLed library may then relink their modified
version of the library
with yours.-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
From what I understand, the purpose of that requirement isn't there so
that you can relink modified versions of the library, but rather so that
you can relink with a new version of the library when it is released.
I think this is perfectly reasonable; if a commercial application is
statically linked with an LGPL library that is found to have a serious
security hole, it is a good thing that I can download the new version of
the library from the author and relink.
(not that I've ever done this, but it's nice to know that I can).
Paul
On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 11:21:41AM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:
Mmm. You're both wrong, in that Rando's statement is incomplete. The
LGPL also requires that one provide a relinkable target for statically
linked binaries. That is, one must deliver the .lib files as well as
the .exe so that the person who then wants to further modify the
LGPLed library may then relink their modified version of the library
with yours.
It has nothing to do with picking your words wrong. You were wrong. Admit it.
Bill
David Ross <drossruby@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<20040806004347.44130.qmail@web21524.mail.yahoo.com>...
mm yes, I should have picked my words better, thanks
--- Rando Christensen <eyez@illuzionz.org> wrote:> David Ross wrote:
> > actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to
the
> > libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread.
Please
> > read more.
>
> No. (L)GPL requires that you provide any modified
> source to whoever you
> distribute the binaries to, not to the original
> author. If you're not
> redistributing it (for example, if you're using it
> internally in your
> company), this is not required.
>
> --
> Rando Christensen
> <eyez@illuzionz.org>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
David Ross wrote:
Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and tell
disgusting lies about software. The best skill I would
ever be able to have. --David Ross
It will probably do no good to say this, but I have been
on this list since 1999, and fully 50% of the negativity
I have seen has been in the last 60-90 days.
One person is responsible, and it isn't Lothar.
My plea to you, David, would be to start out simply: Go for
at least 24 hours without insulting anyone, using inflammatory
language, reversing the blame, or using the t-word.
Once you achieve that, we can try for a full week.
Hal
I think the problem is you're reading too much into Lothar's words.
I suspect English isn't his native language from the way he writes (possibly
German), and quite often minor differences in what a native English speaker
and a non-native speaker would write creates huge misunderstandings in terms
of content as well as tone.
For example, I know many of my German friends whose English isn't 100% will
respond quite often with the English phrase "that's not interesting to me."
I suspect it has an equivalent colloquial in German that is perfectly
harmless, but to my English ears, it's wholly distasteful.
But also, in general, participating online can lead to misunderstandings even
between native speakers, and it helps to simply take everything with a grain
of salt, knowing you might not be gauging their intention as accurately as
you think. People says things meaning no harm, but without the benefit of
in-person voice inflection, you can never know *precisely* how they meant it.
Try and not assume venom in Lothar's words, and allow yourself to hear honest
criticism of your work. From everything I've read, he's seems completely
even-handed and is being more than fair with you.
But if you can't comes to terms with Lothar, take it to private email with him
at least, would you? Leave this ML for discussions about Ruby.
Sean O'Dell
On Tuesday 10 August 2004 12:58, David Ross wrote:
Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and tell
disgusting lies about software. The best skill I would
ever be able to have. --David Ross
The supreme irony of a troll trolling about trolling. Or is that a troll trolling about trolls trolling?
Surreal.
David Ross wrote:
<snip>
Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and tell
disgusting lies about software. The best skill I would
ever be able to have. --David Ross__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
I'm sorry, I don't like being told software that is
widely used it "crap", I will not tolerate such
remarks. --David Ross
--- Hal Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> wrote:
David Ross wrote:
>
> Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and
tell
> disgusting lies about software. The best skill I
would
> ever be able to have. --David Ross
>It will probably do no good to say this, but I have
been
on this list since 1999, and fully 50% of the
negativity
I have seen has been in the last 60-90 days.One person is responsible, and it isn't Lothar.
My plea to you, David, would be to start out simply:
Go for
at least 24 hours without insulting anyone, using
inflammatory
language, reversing the blame, or using the t-word.Once you achieve that, we can try for a full week.
Hal
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
For example, I know many of my German friends whose
English isn't 100% will
respond quite often with the English phrase "that's
not interesting to me."
I suspect it has an equivalent colloquial in German
that is perfectly
harmless, but to my English ears, it's wholly
distasteful.Sean O'Dell
I am aware of language descepencies, but I don't think
saying, "Furthermore, I am glad this toolkit is dead"
is one of them.
--David Ross
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
That's good to hear. I've only been on the mailing list for 90 days, so my perspective was getting warped. I look forward for the return to the famously friendly newsgroup.
Hal Fulton wrote:
David Ross wrote:
Wow, you are right. I can learn how to troll and tell
disgusting lies about software. The best skill I would
ever be able to have. --David RossIt will probably do no good to say this, but I have been
on this list since 1999, and fully 50% of the negativity
I have seen has been in the last 60-90 days.One person is responsible, and it isn't Lothar.
My plea to you, David, would be to start out simply: Go for
at least 24 hours without insulting anyone, using inflammatory
language, reversing the blame, or using the t-word.Once you achieve that, we can try for a full week.
Hal
That phrase is hardly something to get worked up over. You're being
overly-sensitive. Either way, take it to private email with him. The Ruby
ML has a purpose, and this isn't it.
Sean O'Dell
On Tuesday 10 August 2004 13:41, David Ross wrote:
> For example, I know many of my German friends whose
> English isn't 100% will
> respond quite often with the English phrase "that's
> not interesting to me."
> I suspect it has an equivalent colloquial in German
> that is perfectly
> harmless, but to my English ears, it's wholly
> distasteful.I am aware of language descepencies, but I don't think
saying, "Furthermore, I am glad this toolkit is dead"
is one of them.
Hello David,
I am aware of language descepencies, but I don't think
saying, "Furthermore, I am glad this toolkit is dead"
I have to full right to say:
"I am glad this toolkit is dead".
^^^
Read the first word multiple times until you understand the meaning of
"I". Maybe a simple word is easier to understand for you then the 500
words in my argument list that i had written before taking this conclusion.
You can see this message as the last reply to any message you
post to this newsgroup under any of your sender names "David Ross", "H. Simpson"
or "Ruby Script".
**PLONK**
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Hello,
I have been learning more about OO and design patterns now,
and I work at a place where most (actually, I thinks it's all)
of our software development is web related, and it's mostly
PHP and some minor projects are in python.
We are considering starting a project here using Ruby, and
perhaps RubyOnRails (btw David, thanks alot for instiki),
but I really can't see how I could apply OO design to a web
project.
I was wondering if any of you know of a good example I could
take a look at, or if you could share some tips, or links
perhaps.
Thanks,
--lf
Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote:
...
but I really can't see how I could apply OO design to a web
project.
Could you perhaps say why you think that?
Would you expect to apply OO design if it was the same application, except all input and output was at the command line?
James