Slashdot Mirror

You mean like gitorious in Norway - http://gitorious.org/ps3free

all but GaiaManager can be found here:
http://gitorious.org/ps3free

there's also a story:
http://www.ps3-hacks.com/2011/01/29/dmcaed-ps3-git-repositories-cloned/

but the site is a bit... busy right now.

It's already been done for the original repositories; they've been uploaded to Gitorious, which is hosted outside of the US. A remaining problem, though, is that all forks of the repositories were also taken down. Those weren't uploaded to Gitorious, and there were too many of them to count.

How's Android any more open than Nokia?

Nokia just announced its support for Qt as the main platform for all of its smartphones, whether Symbian or Linux-based. (Nokia owns Qt, and it's available as LGPL.) They're coming out with an XML-based GUI and HTML5 scripting, too.

You can develop for mobile, Linux, Windows, and Mac platforms. And you can use your choice of Lin/Mac/Win for dev, too, leveraging FOSS developers knowledge of Qt and Qt Creator.

There's an Android port of Qt, too.

You can also contribute mods/fixes to Qt, I'm not sure if that's the case with Android.

I have always wondered why we needed Diaspora when there are already so many projects. Why not work on one of the existing ones.

This is a long post, and I hope to pursue this conversation in earnest, so please don't take offense if I paraphrase you, and don't hesitate to correct me if you think I'm mischaracterizing you.
Problem 1, as I see it, shouldn't come down to trust- it should come down to capability. Pairing based cryptography (full disclosure: my research area) and fully homomorphic cryptosystems provide mechanisms for blind tabluation under the assumption that you can control the keys. I'd imagine that in an online setting that would work out poorly, but I don't see why it would be so hard to provide such a key with a voter registration card.
Problem 2 is again addressed by PBC. There are cryptosystems (my implementation here , under KSW.py) that provide mechanisms to encrypt arbitrary polynomials for evaluation, which means that you can evaluate the basic set operations secretly under cryptographic hardness assumptions, and there has been a lot of work on how to adapt that to voting machines for exactly this reason. There has also been a very interesting push for what's called differential privacy, which would be very interesting in this context.
Problem 3 is again solved- anyone with a public key could verify the results. The question, of course, is whether the machines themselves are bad, and unless people bring their own voting machines (actually not a bad idea, if the machine could be made cheaply) I see no way to avoid that.

Nokia was working on an iPhone version of the Qt framework. This would have allowed developers to develop on Windows, Linux, Mac OS, Symbian, Maemo and the iPhone using the same framework. Now, the new developer agreement has pretty much put a stop to all of that.

I think you mean Gitorious. They're going for openness, they said.

http://maemo.org/

http://maemo.gitorious.org/

http://bugs.maemo.org/

You don't need to assign copyright to contribute code you want to GPL.

Sure.

If I want to make some improvements to a GPLv3-licensed copy of ExtJS, then I could just make some patches, throw my name under the copyrights, and distribute them online, say on Gitorious.

What I was saying is that if you want the upstream developers (Ext, LLC.) to merge these patches into the main development trunk, I'd assume that they'd want copyright control so that they could distribute them in both the GPLv3'd version and their proprietary-licensed version. If they didn't require the copyright assignment, then they'd rapidly have a rift between the codebase of the proprietary and GPLv3 versions of the library, which would be a PITA for them.

Sure, you don't have to get your changes merged upstream, but if you don't get them merged, it's much less likely that other developers will take the time to pull down, merge-in and then test your patches after they pull down the main branch.

I assumed that this was standard practice for companies that dual-license their code GPL/proprietary. Is it common for such companies to accept GPL-only patches without copyright assignment?

Hi,

I'm the Nokia guy responsible for the project.

It looks like PySide are huge (3x the size of PyQt and 6x the size of SMOKE-generated bindings!) and there is very little improvement they can do if they keep on using Boost::Python to generate PySide.

You're right: the current size of PySide is an issue, especially if you consider mobile environments such as Maemo, let alone the S60 platform. However, that's also why we are working on Shiboken, an alternate binding component which would create CPython extensions directly instead of using Boost.Python as an intermediate layer. Shiboken is still in its infancy, but we expect we'll be able to solve the size issues for once and all, while retaining full Python-level compatibility with the current bindings.

Unfortunately, there's not much info on this yet, but check our repo for the source code: qt.gitorius.org/pyside.

After reading a thread about why C++ wasn't used for developing git (basically, apparently it's used by bad programmers), I decided to take a look at git source code, first file I check and I find this:
http://gitorious.org/git/mainline/blobs/master/commit.c#line144
I suppose that one wasn't written by Linus, otherwise I would tend to say that even wiz programmers tend to misuse goto :P.

Does anyone know QtJambi is doing? I heard that Nokia has stopped maintaining it since purchasing trolltech. Is that a big deal, or was it largely community supported to begin with?

I'm not really well-versed on the subject, but I did do some research earlier today, so I'll try and post what I found. It looks like you're correct, insofar as that Qt Software says it will discontinue Qt Jambi. However, in the same press release, they mention that they will host and help maintain a community-driven version, which (I'm guessing) is here. The site itself makes no mention of the project halting, and the front page shows very regular updates, including a FreeBSD port.

I really hope Jambi enjoys continued development. In my opinion, bindings libraries like Qt Jambi are absolutely critical, both to unlocking the power of a language as well as fostering a diverse tool set and developer base for FOSS platforms. Furthermore, when you combine a cross-platform toolkit like Qt with a cross-platform language like Java (or Mono, for that matter), the result is pretty cool. Developers just have to overcome the misconception that Java is for applets/J2EE/embedded, and that the UI face of Java is Swing. It's a language, like any other, with pros, cons, and fans, and (in my opinion) exceptionally suited for desktop application development.

A major fault that I've seen in numerous sub-threads is the idea that a Java user interface equals Swing. It most certainly does not. Swing is merely Java's complete pure-Java (i.e. cross-platform) user interface geared towards providing a unified look-and-feel. In this respect, it does a good job. While there's nothing inherently wrong with it from a toolkit perspective, it is absolutely not appropriate for usage on the Linux desktop.

Programming for the Linux desktop means more than producing a windowed application; one must integrate their application, both in terms of user interface consistency and application interoperabililty, with a major desktop distribution. Specifically, I'm talking about Linux's "big two" desktop environments, KDE + Qt and GNOME + GTK+. While each of these environments have their preferred languages (C++ and C respectively), many other languages have no issues whatsoever being tightly integrated into them via bindings.

Java is no exception! In Java, I can program a wonderful GNOME/GTK+ application just fine with java-gnome. Similarly, I can program a Qt4 application with Qt Jambi (although I can't seem to find an equivalent KDE4 bindings library) in Java. An application written in either will appear and operate on par with any application written in other languages, either natively (via C or C++) or via another bindings library (Python has a ton of bindings).

Furthermore, just like GTK+ and Qt have cross-platform capability, so do the bindings, and if the appropriate binding library for a given platform is installed on that platform, the Java application, too, will be able to be cross-platform without modification. This is, of course, the job of the distribution and/or installer software, but operates similar to the Deluge (Python) installer for Windows, installing the client port of the toolkit (GTK+, in this case) and the language bindings (PyGTK) alongside the application.

That's exactly how the Mono desktop applications work: they write their logic in native C# and use GTK+ bindings (GTK#, in most cases) to integrate with the Linux desktop environment.

Any Java application written for the Linux desktop that uses Swing over native desktop bindings is foolish. Each has their place, for sure, but on the desktop integration is everything.

More likely it's ripping off these people. http://hackaday.com/2009/05/17/magic-wands-for-disney/ They released open source code for their project here. http://gitorious.org/fantasia

that would make it "prior art", and even I do not think MS could be such a noob.

More likely it's ripping off these people. http://hackaday.com/2009/05/17/magic-wands-for-disney/ They released open source code for their project here. http://gitorious.org/fantasia