I do not know of any "expert systems" which would qualify, but I think it might be fairly effective
to go with mailing lists, archived with, for example,
hypermail,
and searchable with, say
SWISH++, and to have FAQs which can be
updated by the users using, for example,
Faq-O-Matic
I think "disruptive" in this case means
it may be another chance for gurus to
promote their software and training as a
solution to the problem that customers
are dissatisfied with the "quality" of
software, and software development schedules
are too difficult to predict and control.
From "AOP" experts, I expect to see quite
a few descriptions of obvious problems,
and some hand waving "solutions", such
as design/development "methodologies",
"modeling languages", and "patterns",
which are not as disruptive in the
real world as they are in the academic
papers and the product literature.
I think this reflects some of what is in the interview.
There is coming a userland library interface
to netfilter which is more like rtnetlink(3), called
nfnetlink (netfilter netlink), replacing the
current setsockopt interface.
There is going to be an "iptables2" which has some
new functionality related to a change in the data
model for the tables - they will appear more like
linked lists of linked lists than like a
two-dimensional array, and a bunch chunk of the
functionality which was in the iptables command
line program is going to be moved into a library
so other applications at the level of iptables
can also utilitize that functionality.
Connection tracking / NAT will be enhanced to
support more high level application protocol
interactions than FTP, such as IRC, H.323, etc.
> If you are talking about Netscape 4, well there's .
> no comparison. Netscape 4 sucks, while Mozilla
> (latest versions) are great.
I think there is a comparison in that they are both pretty
good web browsers I can run for free on Linux, and for me
Netscape 4 is significantly faster.
Beginning Databases with PostgreSQL.
This is one of those Wrox books which is about 10000 pages, including 80% of what I want to know and 2000% of what I don't.
There other others, but I think they are weaker.
I was disappointed with the one just called
PostgreSQL.
I think a major test of this or any other successor to CVS should be
how amenable is the design to alternative implementations which integrate seamlessly with the reference implementation.
I think the fact that the "arch" solution is designed to be so simple and
clean that it can be implemented with a few shell scripts bodes
well for it.
I would expect it to be pretty easy to integrate the "arch" solution into lots of
other tools by writing a little code which manipulates the files
the same way the "arch" shell scripts do.
I think the revolutionary part is doing it with a small, clean
and implementationally transparent solution.
Cost aside, I think ClearCASE is far too complex to deserve the widespread adoption of CVS.
I think any solution which supplants CVS should be one where the persistent data model
which represents the state of the system is simple and elegant enough that any competent programmer can pretty easily write a completely independent set of software which works
seamlessly and correctly with the "official" software to manipulate the data.
The architecture of "arch" seems like it may provide the important advanced features without the inordinate complexity.
Maybe in an abstract/theoretical sense "previous professional experience" is required, but in
practice I have found there is an open position to be filled and there
is a hiring manager and people in the department, and maybe someone
in human resources and/or a recruiter, and getting the job requires convincing
them I am the best candidate and that I can do the job.
As far as "professional" experience, I think experience having done
something which was real and actually used for something is often close enough to "professional" experience.
Nowadays it is nice that there are some relatively high visibility "open source" projects which can be used to get something approaching "professional experience".
If there is a candidate who appears to be a better "fit" for the "need",
they will get the job. Sales is sales. Getting hired for a job is making a sale.
While there are many applications suited to a point-and-click metaphor with windows and menus and buttons and text fields, there are also many - and perhaps more - where a written or spoken command interface (not just keyboard accelerators) is more efficient/productive and often also more natural/intuitive.
The classic Midnight Commander made progress in some ways towards providing both interfaces where appropriate, allowing a person to do most things through a command interface, and also to quickly/easily switch over to a more GUI-like interface for some operations without losing the state of their application session - especially their own mental state.
Considering, for example, the evolution(?) of the Midnight Commander user interface, how do you feel about the support in GNOME for developing, using, and integrating applications which have strong support for simple, flat, written command interfaces?
Slashdot Mirror
I do not know of any "expert systems" which would qualify, but I think it might be fairly effective to go with mailing lists, archived with, for example, hypermail, and searchable with, say SWISH++, and to have FAQs which can be updated by the users using, for example, Faq-O-Matic
How long before someone claims that organizing and using information which relates various sites this way is some sort of privacy violation?
I think "disruptive" in this case means it may be another chance for gurus to promote their software and training as a solution to the problem that customers are dissatisfied with the "quality" of software, and software development schedules are too difficult to predict and control.
From "AOP" experts, I expect to see quite a few descriptions of obvious problems, and some hand waving "solutions", such as design/development "methodologies", "modeling languages", and "patterns", which are not as disruptive in the real world as they are in the academic papers and the product literature.
It is priced comparably to Amazon at BooksAMillion.
"Best Web Buys" provides price comparisons for books and music.
These are kind of obvious, but it might be useful to take a look at JBossMQ in JBoss, and at OpenJMS.
I think this reflects some of what is in the interview.
There is coming a userland library interface to netfilter which is more like rtnetlink(3), called nfnetlink (netfilter netlink), replacing the current setsockopt interface.
There is going to be an "iptables2" which has some new functionality related to a change in the data model for the tables - they will appear more like linked lists of linked lists than like a two-dimensional array, and a bunch chunk of the functionality which was in the iptables command line program is going to be moved into a library so other applications at the level of iptables can also utilitize that functionality.
Connection tracking / NAT will be enhanced to support more high level application protocol interactions than FTP, such as IRC, H.323, etc.
> If you are talking about Netscape 4, well there's
. > no comparison. Netscape 4 sucks, while Mozilla
> (latest versions) are great.
I think there is a comparison in that they are both pretty good web browsers I can run for free on Linux, and for me Netscape 4 is significantly faster.
> "GNOME is part of the GNU project, and is free software
> (some times referred to as open source software.)"
I take that to be saying that "free software" is not equivalent to "open source" software, although sometimes it is referred to that way.
There are a few decent books about PostgreSQL out there now. It is so much nicer than a few years ago.
Practical PostgreSQL. I think this one just came out as a bound book. I just got it a couple days ago and it is pretty good. It is also online.
Postgresql : Developer's Handbook. I (as a developer) like this one best of all that are out now.
PostgreSQL Essential Reference. This one is pretty good, but I would not say it is essential. :-)
Beginning Databases with PostgreSQL. This is one of those Wrox books which is about 10000 pages, including 80% of what I want to know and 2000% of what I don't.
There other others, but I think they are weaker. I was disappointed with the one just called PostgreSQL.
I think a major test of this or any other successor to CVS should be how amenable is the design to alternative implementations which integrate seamlessly with the reference implementation.
I think the fact that the "arch" solution is designed to be so simple and clean that it can be implemented with a few shell scripts bodes well for it.
I would expect it to be pretty easy to integrate the "arch" solution into lots of other tools by writing a little code which manipulates the files the same way the "arch" shell scripts do.
I think the revolutionary part is doing it with a small, clean and implementationally transparent solution. Cost aside, I think ClearCASE is far too complex to deserve the widespread adoption of CVS.
I think any solution which supplants CVS should be one where the persistent data model which represents the state of the system is simple and elegant enough that any competent programmer can pretty easily write a completely independent set of software which works seamlessly and correctly with the "official" software to manipulate the data.
The architecture of "arch" seems like it may provide the important advanced features without the inordinate complexity.
Maybe in an abstract/theoretical sense "previous professional experience" is required, but in practice I have found there is an open position to be filled and there is a hiring manager and people in the department, and maybe someone in human resources and/or a recruiter, and getting the job requires convincing them I am the best candidate and that I can do the job.
As far as "professional" experience, I think experience having done something which was real and actually used for something is often close enough to "professional" experience. Nowadays it is nice that there are some relatively high visibility "open source" projects which can be used to get something approaching "professional experience".
If there is a candidate who appears to be a better "fit" for the "need", they will get the job. Sales is sales. Getting hired for a job is making a sale.
While there are many applications suited to a point-and-click metaphor with windows and menus and buttons and text fields, there are also many - and perhaps more - where a written or spoken command interface (not just keyboard accelerators) is more efficient/productive and often also more natural/intuitive.
The classic Midnight Commander made progress in some ways towards providing both interfaces where appropriate, allowing a person to do most things through a command interface, and also to quickly/easily switch over to a more GUI-like interface for some operations without losing the state of their application session - especially their own mental state.
Considering, for example, the evolution(?) of the Midnight Commander user interface, how do you feel about the support in GNOME for developing, using, and integrating applications which have strong support for simple, flat, written command interfaces?