Yeah, if we had an opportunity to go to SAPDB about a year ago, we would have.
Instead we delt with these pains in Postgresql 7.1 till last month, when we upgraded to 7.2.
That fixed all the problems you have mentioned. Vacuum is low cost now and doesn't do excessive locking. Now there isn't really a reason to switch for us.
I think the message isn't it shouldn't be abolished. NAT is useful. It's people thinking that NAT is some form of security that should be abolished.
I'm unclear what the top parent poster's problem is? Why do you need NAT if you are given your own set of IPs to work with? You will still have a firewall at the front (where the NAT+Firewall *was*), right?
The magazine offers several reviews (each by a scientist reviewing the part of the book that covers the science they know best) plus an overview of the book.
The long and short of the criticisms are that the book ignores lots of works, cherry-picks results from works he does sites (ie, he only mentions the results that back his claims), and that he fails to understand most of the statistics he uses to argue with.
Rik's a really smart guy, but he isn't (or, rather, wasn't) so good at keeping the mainline kernel moving forward. Despite his comment about Linus dropping patches (which is true). What he didn't mention is that he never resubmitted the patches. He tried once and then dropped them.
I thinks Rik's VM will become really really good as he maintains a branch for himself. When it's 95% of the way done, he can then work on merging it into maintstream (ie, the Linus kernel). Then we'll have a really kick-ass VM.
But Rik wasn't working well with the established method for dealing with the Linus kernel. Linus then made the choice to go with a VM from someone who *did* know how to work with the Linus Kernel.
It's not a technical issue, it's a maintence issue.
Read up on the kernel cousin stuff with Rik and Linus talking about this.
Ciao!
Re:Formatting of IMG suggestion...
on
Slashdot Code Update
·
· Score: 3, Informative
ALT is for (and I quote from w3c's specification):
For user agents that cannot display images, forms, or applets, this attribute specifies alternate text.
Where as the TITLE attribute is for:
This attribute offers advisory information about the element for which it is set.
Not that I can blame you for thinking otherwise, as most of the web is filled with horrible examples of HTML being abused.
The above was from
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/objects.html#h-1 3.2
Okay, let's start with the beginning. Mr. Mitchell first (rightly) complains
about someone at Red Hat wiping the contents of some worker's laptop to replace
Windows with Linux. This is first, a straw-man argument (we can't argue
against it, but it has nothing to do with linux, but with a stupid Tech).
Likewise, his arguments about one peice of software (generalized into all
Linux word processing software) at a point obviously somewhere in his past (but
not current, he no longer works there) isn't terribly suprising, or valuable.
It doesn't say anything except that some version of Applixware in the past,
didn't do a great job of spell checking.
Then Mr. Mitchell tries to gain our confidence in his ability to criticize all
of linux by saying he appreciates Linux "Technically". The fact that Mr.
Mitchell then says that the "Linux community is a muddled and unfocused lot"
really shows that he doesn't understand how Linux is developed. This is an
open source, anyone-can-play, large group of people who can (and usually) do
what they want.
Mr. Mitchell's claim that the "the war [for the desktop] is over" is also
bizarre. This is something I have heard a lot, but it makes no sense. Was the
"war" for department stores over after Sears? How about for the railroads?
Nothing is over. The world keeps going. And, as I said above, people in the
Linux Community can and will do what they want.
The claim that one part of a community is distracting the community as a
whole is also another fallacy. This is not provable and most likely doesn't
reflect reality. People who work on the desktop do so because it's what they
want to do. They may do desktop work elsewhere (maybe for Windows or Macs) if
they didn't have Linux. You don't know.
Of course, what Mr. Mitchell is really saying is that he doesn't think
competition is worthwhile. Doing something for the thrill of doing it isn't
worthwhile. I disagree. Every major advancement, and many minor ones had
people who weren't motivated saying things like, "Who cares? Can't be done. No
one will want it." and have been proven wrong.
I'm going to wrap this up, because I got side tracked and have other things
to do. But consider his final statements. Mr. Mitchell wants the Linux
Community to give up because he wants Linux to succeed. This is defeatist and
makes little sense. The Linux community should do what it wants to do.
Finally, just because I have to say this. If you work for a company that
sells an OS, you should make all efforts to use that OS. Period. The
president of Ford does NOT drive a Toyota. The company cars are not Nissans.
I had a cool Algebra teacher in high school. I loved programming and she loaned me one of the school calculators (TI-80). I wrote a huge complicated (for that simple language and not having a real text editor and the ability to save to a computer) program that did the Quadratic Formula (for solving quadratics).
I wrote it so that if the solution wasn't an integer, it would hand me the peices in the same form that I would have when I was done solving it by hand.
I handed in homework with no work and a handwritten copy of the program to the teacher. She liked it, handed it around, and gave me an "A+".:-)
Lets assume that this testing for cheats is done and that everyone knows it (ie, it's mentioned once per semester).
This would mean that (as at the end of the article) very few people would cheat this way.
For each set of "matches":
If paper(s) match against a paper from a previous year or semester, then it's obvious that this current student is cheating.
If the paper(s) match only in the current semester, bring both of the students, and interview them seperately. It would be fairly easy to ask questions that would make it obvious that he or she cheated. Why? Because people cheat to be lazy. If they could provide the answers off the top of their head, they'd not need to cheat.
For the really odd case that both answer questions equally well, then you'd either have to mark it down for both or let them go. Your choice (I'd make it depend on whether they both seemed well versed let 'em go, else get 'em both in trouble).
This process is made easier if one has records of prior cheating or potential cheating.
If it doesn't have any source to verify the fact that the executable may be based on licensed code, or rather any testing or dissection to prove this, then anyone can claim all they want. For all anyone knows or cares, someone frmo the open source community can say MS' ProductX is based on source code X and create a ruckus.
Yeah, right. If the allegedly infringing company says it's based on a known opensource project, it looks like the aforementioned opensource project, and behaves like the aforementioned opensource project; then you have enough to go to court.
You can easily get a case to court if it smells, walks, sounds, and feels like a duck. Once in court, it's no problem to subpoena the source and find out.
Disclaimer: I work for Rackspace as a Developer, and like it:-)
From what I've seen of Rackspace from talking to sales and support, they are very concerned about being the best at what they do. But they don't do what you want them to do; you wanted someone else to do administration and security for you.
I would probably just go with Debian and a managed hosting solution (like Rackspace) and then ask someone who is very knowledgable about security to lock down your site. You won't need new security administration until you upgrade to the next Debian version. Don't forget to subscribe to debian-security-announce, too.
I'm sorry, but it costs money to have someone maintain security. And this CT company ain't willing to give away what skills they have. Though it doesn't sound like they play a fair ball game.
It's not that you'd see "Mickey's Chinese Food" and "Mickey's Rolling Papers" (What are those?). It's that you'd be able to show Steamboat Willy anyplace you'd want.
The early movies, which are a part of our history and heritage would become public domain. Which is comparable to the idea anyone should be allowed to play Mozart.
Covad is in competition with their customers.
on
DSL Woes
·
· Score: 4
I would be a bit more critical than Michael. Covad reciently bought BlueStar.net. Covad now competes with DSLnetworks and InternetExpress (among other ISPs). I don't think it's coincidence that they yanked the connections rather abruptly.
Sending email to the end users (not the ISPs that were Covad's customers, but the ISP's customers) reeks of trying to scoop customers for their own partered and owned ISPs.
For those too lazy to look at the link, the summary is that you have two prisoners. One will be let out based on the results of a game. It's played in rounds. Each round each prisoner decides to cooperate or compete.
Both cooperate, each get 3 credits
Both compete, each get 1 credit
If one competes and the other cooperates, the competative one gets 5 credits and the cooperative one gets nothing.
I mean, things like the bluetooth comment (there is bluetooth stuff; I saw a telephone headset and something else....I forget... at a store) are innaccurate. And, frankly, it's wired. Who cares?
Having lived there for 4 years, I can say that they have the best sushi (The best sushi restraunt? Sushi Expo in San Jose where Hillsdale and Camden meet, a little north of I85).
On the flipside, I can say the housing situation sucks. My apartment, while I worked at TurboLinux, was in Pacifica. It was a very cool town, just 10 minutes from San Fran. 25 minutes from Brisbane, where TL was. Right near the ocean, easy walk to a organic store where I could get the best veggies and fruits.
However, it leaked like crazy all rainy season (winter) and cost about $2000/mo. and was a 2 bedroom 800+ sq/ft. apartment.
I decided to move to San Antonio after leaving TL to work for RackSpace. My apartment is now 1600sq/ft for only $800/mo.
Double the space for half the price.:)
Some data points for those who don't know:
A Housing survey when I left, 6 months ago said the average 1 bedroom apartment was $1700/mo.
Most apartments are rented, sight-unseen, within hours of their being put in papers.
If you make only $50k a year, you probably are homeless, in massive debt, or living with a large number of roommates, or some combination.
First, a little back history. TurboLinux used to be known as Pacific HiTech. A company that would
package up software available on the net and sell it on CDs. The worked a lot in Japan and China, in part because of the original owners, Cliff and Iris Miller.
I have been told, but don't know it, that the Japanese TurboLinux developer team made the original RedHat CD Distro. I don't know how much of that is fact, or what, but that's what I was told.
Anyway, TurboLinux happened after RedHat and Pacific HiTech had a falling out of some kind. I don't know any details.
I went to work for TurboLinux about a year and a half ago. I spent a year
working for them as a Build Engineer.
Basically, me and this other guy did everything for the US distribution. We built the packages, compiled the kernels, and fixed the annoying installer and annoying turbo tools.
We were entirely independent from the Japanese team. Our distros were never in sync, a fact that drove our management nuts.
You see, all of our staff in the US were people with experience in non-OpenSource/GPL software. The
developers that were OpenSource advocates
had to constantly remind these people what OpenSource meant.
What Paul Thomas said in the CNet article is something that was constantly repeated by the upper management. I usually heard it from Rok Sosic, though. Paul Thomas has no experience with Open Source or Linux. His last job involved fixing a sinking ship. TL wasn't a sinking ship, but it's corperate culture (in the US) was not healthy. The biggest problem was lack of direction.
Anyway, the theory of Converging Linux Distros goes like this:
Most distros have something unique to encourage people to buy them.
All that uniqueness can be taken by other distros (it's open source!)
Software Vendors want only one distro so they
can compile/configure/package their software once and have it work everywhere.
Therefore all will be similar.
Therefore only one will survive.
Weirdly enough, TurboLinux existed because there was a market in Japan and China for localized versions. I honestly think that even if GLIBC 3.0
came out tomorrow with perfect I18N and all the software in 90% of the Linux Distros became translated overnight, that still there'd be a need for a different distro for each country.
Culture and national pride almost demands it.
Anyway, distro compatability was TurboLinux's biggest problem. The JP version of TurboLinux wasn't compatable with the US version of TurboLinux. Imagine how companies like IBM and Oracle hated that. They had to do a TL(jp) and TL(en) version of their products for Linux.
Here's why: In Japan, if you say a product will be gold on the 1st of the month, then it will be gold on the first of the month.
In the US, we stretch deadlines like crazy. We cannot ship a product that is missing a certain feature.
In Japan, they need certain versions of some packages (for localizing purposes). Usually older ones. In the US we have to have the latest versions. (We jumped from TL4 to TL6 because we would, literally get calls saying that RedHat was version 5, and we were 4, so RedHat must be newer!)
In Japan, they had to have a modified glibc. In the US, we used the latest version.
Anyway, it was basically the case that TurboLinux didn't (and probably still doesn't) understand what OpenSource is and how to make it pay. Management there, like Rok Sosic and Lonn Johnson (marketing/sales VP) would come up to developers and say how Open Source just doesn't work and/or make sense and how you can't make money off of it.
My answer was usually, "you mean you haven't figured out how to make money from it, yet". In my mind, TurboLinux was still looking for a peice of property that they could control and make money with, like a traditional manufacturing plant.
The world doesn't work that way anymore. Ask Microsoft. Even as MS tries to hang on to the control methods of distribution, they are working hard on service. The evolution of.NET is a good example. You know they want to control it, but at the same time, you can see them figuring out it won't be 100% controlled.
Music and MP3s is another example. The world just doesn't work that way anymore.
Anyway, just to finish this up. TurboLinux laid-off about 50% of the US staff, in what I was told, to set a firm direction for the company.
I was included in that layoff, the only build engineer at the time.
TL7 was supposed to be on shelves by now, but it isn't.
To be honest, I hope they did the right thing and
just had the JP team do TL7(en). In this way, you
would have a TL(jp) and TL(en) that would finally be compatible with each other.
If they are having TL7 being done in the US, by
a seperate team, it will be (in my opinion) a costly mistake.
As a postscript, I'd like to add that the Japanese Developers were really cool guys. But either I
don't understand business rules in Japan at all (a strong possibility) or the JP management was a bunch of doofuses. Or a combination.
We also had some Chinese developers who'd take a combination of the JP and US versions to make their distro. The Chinese developers were also really cool folks, who deserve credit for their work, too.
Taint might help, but would your average perl programmer be smart enought to look for formatting strings in a catalog pointed to by an environmental variable?
I haven't done any localization in perl, so I'm not sure how it's done, but still....
Maybe the programmer wouldn't know what the localization stuff is and not untaint it....
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, if we had an opportunity to go to SAPDB about a year ago, we would have.
Instead we delt with these pains in Postgresql 7.1 till last month, when we upgraded to 7.2.
That fixed all the problems you have mentioned. Vacuum is low cost now and doesn't do excessive locking. Now there isn't really a reason to switch for us.
Though, we'll still look into it.
Ciao!
My favorites (I had ACS and MCS) were Rocky's Boots and Robot Odyssey.
Those were fun games. :-)
I'm confused. Are you saying you have a NAT+Firewall and you are asking how you would set things up with IPv6?
Answer: You keep the firewall and toss NAT.
Or are you asking how good the Linux IPv6 filewall stuff is? I don't know about that...I assume it works. But I don't know.
I think the message isn't it shouldn't be abolished. NAT is useful. It's people thinking that NAT is some form of security that should be abolished.
I'm unclear what the top parent poster's problem is? Why do you need NAT if you are given your own set of IPs to work with? You will still have a firewall at the front (where the NAT+Firewall *was*), right?
The magazine offers several reviews (each by a scientist reviewing the part of the book that covers the science they know best) plus an overview of the book.
The long and short of the criticisms are that the book ignores lots of works, cherry-picks results from works he does sites (ie, he only mentions the results that back his claims), and that he fails to understand most of the statistics he uses to argue with.
Rik's a really smart guy, but he isn't (or, rather, wasn't) so good at keeping the mainline kernel moving forward. Despite his comment about Linus dropping patches (which is true). What he didn't mention is that he never resubmitted the patches. He tried once and then dropped them.
I thinks Rik's VM will become really really good as he maintains a branch for himself. When it's 95% of the way done, he can then work on merging it into maintstream (ie, the Linus kernel). Then we'll have a really kick-ass VM.
But Rik wasn't working well with the established method for dealing with the Linus kernel. Linus then made the choice to go with a VM from someone who *did* know how to work with the Linus Kernel.
It's not a technical issue, it's a maintence issue.
Read up on the kernel cousin stuff with Rik and Linus talking about this.
Ciao!
For user agents that cannot display images, forms, or applets, this attribute specifies alternate text.
Where as the TITLE attribute is for:
This attribute offers advisory information about the element for which it is set.
Not that I can blame you for thinking otherwise, as most of the web is filled with horrible examples of HTML being abused.
The above was from http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/objects.html#h-1 3.2
Okay, let's start with the beginning. Mr. Mitchell first (rightly) complains about someone at Red Hat wiping the contents of some worker's laptop to replace Windows with Linux. This is first, a straw-man argument (we can't argue against it, but it has nothing to do with linux, but with a stupid Tech).
Likewise, his arguments about one peice of software (generalized into all Linux word processing software) at a point obviously somewhere in his past (but not current, he no longer works there) isn't terribly suprising, or valuable. It doesn't say anything except that some version of Applixware in the past, didn't do a great job of spell checking.
Then Mr. Mitchell tries to gain our confidence in his ability to criticize all of linux by saying he appreciates Linux "Technically". The fact that Mr. Mitchell then says that the "Linux community is a muddled and unfocused lot" really shows that he doesn't understand how Linux is developed. This is an open source, anyone-can-play, large group of people who can (and usually) do what they want.
Mr. Mitchell's claim that the "the war [for the desktop] is over" is also bizarre. This is something I have heard a lot, but it makes no sense. Was the "war" for department stores over after Sears? How about for the railroads? Nothing is over. The world keeps going. And, as I said above, people in the Linux Community can and will do what they want.
The claim that one part of a community is distracting the community as a whole is also another fallacy. This is not provable and most likely doesn't reflect reality. People who work on the desktop do so because it's what they want to do. They may do desktop work elsewhere (maybe for Windows or Macs) if they didn't have Linux. You don't know.
Of course, what Mr. Mitchell is really saying is that he doesn't think competition is worthwhile. Doing something for the thrill of doing it isn't worthwhile. I disagree. Every major advancement, and many minor ones had people who weren't motivated saying things like, "Who cares? Can't be done. No one will want it." and have been proven wrong.
I'm going to wrap this up, because I got side tracked and have other things to do. But consider his final statements. Mr. Mitchell wants the Linux Community to give up because he wants Linux to succeed. This is defeatist and makes little sense. The Linux community should do what it wants to do.
Finally, just because I have to say this. If you work for a company that sells an OS, you should make all efforts to use that OS. Period. The president of Ford does NOT drive a Toyota. The company cars are not Nissans.
Well I don't know about you, but I feel beter.
All the static electricity would have to do is overload something in the port circuits and then the chip goes bang.
Whether this kills the whole mother board is dependent on the mobo design.
I wrote it so that if the solution wasn't an integer, it would hand me the peices in the same form that I would have when I was done solving it by hand.
I handed in homework with no work and a handwritten copy of the program to the teacher. She liked it, handed it around, and gave me an "A+". :-)
Ciao!
Lets assume that this testing for cheats is done and that everyone knows it (ie, it's mentioned once per semester).
This would mean that (as at the end of the article) very few people would cheat this way.
For each set of "matches":
If paper(s) match against a paper from a previous year or semester, then it's obvious that this current student is cheating.
If the paper(s) match only in the current semester, bring both of the students, and interview them seperately. It would be fairly easy to ask questions that would make it obvious that he or she cheated. Why? Because people cheat to be lazy. If they could provide the answers off the top of their head, they'd not need to cheat.
For the really odd case that both answer questions equally well, then you'd either have to mark it down for both or let them go. Your choice (I'd make it depend on whether they both seemed well versed let 'em go, else get 'em both in trouble).
This process is made easier if one has records of prior cheating or potential cheating.
Ciao!
Take your pick: GPL or BSD Licensed. :-)
Yeah, right. If the allegedly infringing company says it's based on a known opensource project, it looks like the aforementioned opensource project, and behaves like the aforementioned opensource project; then you have enough to go to court.
You can easily get a case to court if it smells, walks, sounds, and feels like a duck. Once in court, it's no problem to subpoena the source and find out.
Ciao!
Let's try rephrasing this:
This version of MacOSX will come with dev tools. It's is "quasi-beta" which means it's MS-quality release code (*snicker*).
Future versions/releases will *not* come with the dev tools CD.
Yeah, some will always be available at the website, but not everything you got with this version.
Ciao!
They are not selling the dev tools with every version of Mac OS X. Just this "sort of beta version" that they reciently released.
From what I've seen of Rackspace from talking to sales and support, they are very concerned about being the best at what they do. But they don't do what you want them to do; you wanted someone else to do administration and security for you.
I would probably just go with Debian and a managed hosting solution (like Rackspace) and then ask someone who is very knowledgable about security to lock down your site. You won't need new security administration until you upgrade to the next Debian version. Don't forget to subscribe to debian-security-announce, too.
I'm sorry, but it costs money to have someone maintain security. And this CT company ain't willing to give away what skills they have. Though it doesn't sound like they play a fair ball game.
Ciao!
How are you networking with that?
It's not that you'd see "Mickey's Chinese Food" and "Mickey's Rolling Papers" (What are those?). It's that you'd be able to show Steamboat Willy anyplace you'd want.
The early movies, which are a part of our history and heritage would become public domain. Which is comparable to the idea anyone should be allowed to play Mozart.
I would be a bit more critical than Michael. Covad reciently bought BlueStar.net. Covad now competes with DSLnetworks and InternetExpress (among other ISPs). I don't think it's coincidence that they yanked the connections rather abruptly.
Sending email to the end users (not the ISPs that were Covad's customers, but the ISP's customers) reeks of trying to scoop customers for their own partered and owned ISPs.
It all looks rather suspicious to me.
Here is a link to an online version of the game:g /prisoners_dilemma.html
http://www.dhegarty.de/pop_philosophy/downshiftin
For those too lazy to look at the link, the summary is that you have two prisoners. One will be let out based on the results of a game. It's played in rounds. Each round each prisoner decides to cooperate or compete.
I'm not sure this is pro-cooperative. Oh well.
I mean, things like the bluetooth comment (there is bluetooth stuff; I saw a telephone headset and something else....I forget... at a store) are innaccurate. And, frankly, it's wired. Who cares?
Having lived there for 4 years, I can say that they have the best sushi (The best sushi restraunt? Sushi Expo in San Jose where Hillsdale and Camden meet, a little north of I85).
On the flipside, I can say the housing situation sucks. My apartment, while I worked at TurboLinux, was in Pacifica. It was a very cool town, just 10 minutes from San Fran. 25 minutes from Brisbane, where TL was. Right near the ocean, easy walk to a organic store where I could get the best veggies and fruits.
However, it leaked like crazy all rainy season (winter) and cost about $2000/mo. and was a 2 bedroom 800+ sq/ft. apartment.
I decided to move to San Antonio after leaving TL to work for RackSpace. My apartment is now 1600sq/ft for only $800/mo.
Double the space for half the price. :)
Some data points for those who don't know:
Ciao!
I have been told, but don't know it, that the Japanese TurboLinux developer team made the original RedHat CD Distro. I don't know how much of that is fact, or what, but that's what I was told.
Anyway, TurboLinux happened after RedHat and Pacific HiTech had a falling out of some kind. I don't know any details.
I went to work for TurboLinux about a year and a half ago. I spent a year working for them as a Build Engineer. Basically, me and this other guy did everything for the US distribution. We built the packages, compiled the kernels, and fixed the annoying installer and annoying turbo tools.
We were entirely independent from the Japanese team. Our distros were never in sync, a fact that drove our management nuts.
You see, all of our staff in the US were people with experience in non-OpenSource/GPL software. The developers that were OpenSource advocates had to constantly remind these people what OpenSource meant.
What Paul Thomas said in the CNet article is something that was constantly repeated by the upper management. I usually heard it from Rok Sosic, though. Paul Thomas has no experience with Open Source or Linux. His last job involved fixing a sinking ship. TL wasn't a sinking ship, but it's corperate culture (in the US) was not healthy. The biggest problem was lack of direction.
Anyway, the theory of Converging Linux Distros goes like this:
Weirdly enough, TurboLinux existed because there was a market in Japan and China for localized versions. I honestly think that even if GLIBC 3.0 came out tomorrow with perfect I18N and all the software in 90% of the Linux Distros became translated overnight, that still there'd be a need for a different distro for each country. Culture and national pride almost demands it.
Anyway, distro compatability was TurboLinux's biggest problem. The JP version of TurboLinux wasn't compatable with the US version of TurboLinux. Imagine how companies like IBM and Oracle hated that. They had to do a TL(jp) and TL(en) version of their products for Linux.
Here's why: In Japan, if you say a product will be gold on the 1st of the month, then it will be gold on the first of the month. In the US, we stretch deadlines like crazy. We cannot ship a product that is missing a certain feature.
In Japan, they need certain versions of some packages (for localizing purposes). Usually older ones. In the US we have to have the latest versions. (We jumped from TL4 to TL6 because we would, literally get calls saying that RedHat was version 5, and we were 4, so RedHat must be newer!)
In Japan, they had to have a modified glibc. In the US, we used the latest version.
Anyway, it was basically the case that TurboLinux didn't (and probably still doesn't) understand what OpenSource is and how to make it pay. Management there, like Rok Sosic and Lonn Johnson (marketing/sales VP) would come up to developers and say how Open Source just doesn't work and/or make sense and how you can't make money off of it.
My answer was usually, "you mean you haven't figured out how to make money from it, yet". In my mind, TurboLinux was still looking for a peice of property that they could control and make money with, like a traditional manufacturing plant.
The world doesn't work that way anymore. Ask Microsoft. Even as MS tries to hang on to the control methods of distribution, they are working hard on service. The evolution of .NET is a good example. You know they want to control it, but at the same time, you can see them figuring out it won't be 100% controlled.
Music and MP3s is another example. The world just doesn't work that way anymore.
Anyway, just to finish this up. TurboLinux laid-off about 50% of the US staff, in what I was told, to set a firm direction for the company. I was included in that layoff, the only build engineer at the time.
TL7 was supposed to be on shelves by now, but it isn't. To be honest, I hope they did the right thing and just had the JP team do TL7(en). In this way, you would have a TL(jp) and TL(en) that would finally be compatible with each other. If they are having TL7 being done in the US, by a seperate team, it will be (in my opinion) a costly mistake.
As a postscript, I'd like to add that the Japanese Developers were really cool guys. But either I don't understand business rules in Japan at all (a strong possibility) or the JP management was a bunch of doofuses. Or a combination.
We also had some Chinese developers who'd take a combination of the JP and US versions to make their distro. The Chinese developers were also really cool folks, who deserve credit for their work, too.
Ciao!
I was one of two people who did all the majority of the work on TL 4 and 6. TWO people.
TL has some cool features, but it isn't very good.
I haven't done any localization in perl, so I'm not sure how it's done, but still....
Maybe the programmer wouldn't know what the localization stuff is and not untaint it....
Ciao!