It seems to me the way to make Mozilla more compact is to use STL and to make less things components.
Not gonna happen. The Mozilla.org staff still seem to believe that support for templates in C++ compilers is still to immature, to allow using templates in Mozilla code. Now, if they won't even allow templates in general, there's no way they're gonna be down with using the STL.
Maybe on some completely ridiculous, obscure platform, the C++ compiler doesn't support templates, but I have to admit.. I have no idea what that platform would be.
Why not just keep up the ultra lean Phoenix AND the feature rich mozilla? Maybe I am unusual but I have used almost every feature of Mozilla, be it grouped bookmarks, tabbed browsing, popup killing, LDAP support in the mail client, multiple POP accounts, different SMTP servers per account etc. It has taken years to get all these features into Mozilla, how long will it take to get them into the "new" mozilla?
Yes, exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Yes, I did RTFA, thank you. And I will admit, I initially mis-read part of the above quote:
I originally interpreted this part:
Phoenix is simply smaller, faster, and better -- especially better not because it has every conflicting feature wanted by each segment of the Mozilla community
As saying "Phoenix is better because it doesn't have all the different, conflicting features wanted by each segment of the Mozilla community."
And that statement I would fundamentally disagree with. If anything, I think Mozilla is still lacking some really cool features: user customizable key-bindings (via a built in GUI, not by hand editing XUL code) , user-customizable context menu (again, not by hand editing the XUL), right-click editing of bookmarks from within the bookmark menu, etc. But the Mozilla.org staff seems determined to resist these types of features, describing them as "bloat."
As far as:
but because it has a strong "add-on" extension mechanism.
I think that's great. And if the net result is that somebody can take Phoenix, and more easily add the types of features I described above, as a "plug-in", which can be optionally installed, then great.
What I don't get though, is how much better an extension mechanism Phoenix has, than Mozilla. People have managed to add all sorts of neat shit into Mozilla already, using whatever mechanisms are provided for doing so... don't believe me, just go browse around Mozdev for a while. Multizilla, Optimoz, Easysearch, etc. have extended Mozilla quite nicely already.
I'm tired of software developers creating an artificial hardware upgrade path for everyone to follow.
ya know, I can appreciate that not everybody can afford to rush out and buy and brand new, top of the line, 3 gigahertz machine with a gig of RAM... but the simple fact is, hardware becomes obsolete at some point, and if you want to run modern software, you have to upgrade.
How much other modern software *will* run on a 200mhz box?
in other words:
I'm tired of people with boat anchors for computers creating an artificial barrier to upgrading software for everyone to follow.
Yes, the XPFE browser will go away, but the lighter faster components that replace it will provide as much functionality with a more modular approach. I'm sure you'll still be able to download a monolithic package with Phoenix/Minotaur/etc. all together with all the Phoenix extensions you know and love, giving you just as much breadth of functionality in one package if you want it. The key is that for those who want smaller, faster and lighter, they can have it their way too, and peaceful coexistance will be possible.
Well, as long as the new browser has all the functionality of the old one, or anything it lacks in comparison can easily be "plugged in", I won't complain.
I think the main reason this whole thing bothers me, is because it appears to be yet another symptom of the freaking incredible egotism of certain people at Mozilla.org. Some people there seem to think that they are the only ones who know what is right or proper for Mozilla, and that nobody else's opinon matters.
In fact, I get the feeling that certain Mozilla.org individuals want to drop the current browser, not for purely technical reasons, but because it has too much contribution from the community at large, as opposed to the elitists at Mozilla.
Why do I say this, well look at this quote from the roadmap:
Another example of the high cost of app-suite integration is the inherently overloaded and complicated user interface (just one example out of too many: the File / New sub-menu). The target audience of the suite was never clear, and seemed to shift back and forth with prevailing business- and voluntary-contributor-driven winds.
A common question is going to be, "I want to write code! Can I help?" The quick answer is, "If we need your help, we'll ask for it." The best way you can help is by building the products, testing them, making suggestions in newsgroups and mailing lists, and filing bugs.
Sounds like they're saying in essence "we don't need no stinkin' help from voluntary contributors, just let us build what *we* want to build, and you'll like it, whether you like it or not."
This is lame. I *LIKE* the existing XPFE browser / application suite.
Phoenix is nice, the new standalone mail/news client will probably be nice as well, but I see no good reason for them to drop the application suite.
All this talk about how Mozilla is too big, too bloated, has too many features, etc., is a load of shit, IMHO. Unless you're trying to run Mozilla on a freaking Pentium 100 with 64 megs of RAM or something else antiquated like that, performance is fine. And if anything, there are still plenty of features that *should* be put into Mozilla, that the Mozilla.org folks refuse to implement, despite how many votes the RFE has, or how many people want it.
I say they should just keep developing Mozilla as it is, keep improving it, keep adding features, and let the people who want to work on Minotaur, Phoenix, whatever, do so.
Great, now Sarah Brady and her idiotic minions are trolling/.
Just what we needed....
Re:What % of the shuttle has been recovered?
on
More on Columbia
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Are there any estimates as to what percentage of the space shuttle this might comprise?
One of the articles linked from this/. story briefly mentions that very issue. IIRC, they said the amount of debris recovered so far, comprises about 11% of the total weight of the shuttle.
Do you suppose they have any documented guidelines for deciding when to classify a group as "terrorist?" If so, are these guidelines available to the public? If not, why not? Time for an FOIA request? Is the decision made by one person (The President) or by Congress or what? Can such a decision be appealed in court? Do the "accused" get the benefit of "due process?"
Does anybody consider that if we continue to fight terrorism the way Bu$h and his outlaw cowboy posse thinks we should, there will be MORE terrorism, not less.
Yes, exactly. Thank you, finally somebody on Slashdot who knows what the fuck they're talking about.
But I don't understand how the 'USA PATRIOT Act' or attacking Iraq will do anything to make me safer.
That's because it won't. The "USA Patriot Act II" and attacking Iraq will in fact, do much to make you LESS safe.
No, it's not premature. It's never too early to start worrying about protecting our civil liberties. You can believe my Congressional representatives are going to be receiving letters and phone calls about this, starting next week.
Why should a single person who has never missed a payment, never been late, never screwed anyone over by not paying back borrowed money and has a 12-month nest egg that he has painstakingly assembled be treated the same as the majority of people who live pay check to pay check, overspend their income, and do not act with restraint and discipline?
If you're asking that in the context of the story, that is in relation to getting hired for a job, I'll tell you why.... because all of that stuff, while nice, has nothing, zero, zilch, nada to do with a potential employee's suitability for a job.
I predict that it will fail. UnitedLinux and their psudeo open-source approach is going to flop miserably, and probably take ruin SuSE, SCO, Turbo and Connectiva in the process.
Just my opinion, but I don't think that this approach of mixing closed source stuff and open source stuff, and then trying to slap a per-seat license fee on the whole mess, is going to catch on. This is the same reason that I don't expect anything to come of SuSE's so called "Exchange killer." I think people either want (true) open source, or they'd just as soon go with something proprietary anyway.
Let's get the biggest/. effect of all time going, people... I want her server to overload to the point that it catches fire and burns here nice 6 bedroom spam mansion to the dirt....
Are you kidding? Just every story? ef that... this link, http://www.dataresourceconsulting.com/ should be permanent link off the/. front page, and should be automatically appended to EVERY SINGLE POST posted on/. from now until the end of time.
Agreed. Now, how do we get IBM to release a nice generic PPC based motherboard, in an ATX form factor, with PCI slots, using regular PC memory, blah, blah...
If it was easy to build a machine based on a fundamentally different architecture, without being forced to pay the big bucks for an RS/6000, a Sun Sparc box, etc, then I bet Linux / BSD / Hurd / Etc. on those platforms could really take off.
Simple dress and presentation codes exist for reasons that are easily understood by most 5 year-olds.
The "reasons" you speak of may be easily understood by a 5 year old... but the difference between the 5 year old and an adult is that the adult knows that the reasons are actually bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me the way to make Mozilla more compact is to use STL and to make less things components.
Not gonna happen. The Mozilla.org staff still seem to believe that support for templates in C++ compilers is still to immature, to allow using templates in Mozilla code. Now, if they won't even allow templates in general, there's no way they're gonna be down with using the STL.
Maybe on some completely ridiculous, obscure platform, the C++ compiler doesn't support templates, but I have to admit.. I have no idea what that platform would be.
Why not just keep up the ultra lean Phoenix AND the feature rich mozilla? Maybe I am unusual but I have used almost every feature of Mozilla, be it grouped bookmarks, tabbed browsing, popup killing, LDAP support in the mail client, multiple POP accounts, different SMTP servers per account etc. It has taken years to get all these features into Mozilla, how long will it take to get them into the "new" mozilla?
Yes, exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Yes, I did RTFA, thank you. And I will admit, I initially mis-read part of the above quote:
I originally interpreted this part:
Phoenix is simply smaller, faster, and better -- especially better not because it has every conflicting feature wanted by each segment of the Mozilla community
As saying "Phoenix is better because it doesn't have all the different, conflicting features wanted by each segment of the Mozilla community."
And that statement I would fundamentally disagree with. If anything, I think Mozilla is still lacking some really cool features: user customizable key-bindings (via a built in GUI, not by hand editing XUL code) , user-customizable context menu (again, not by hand editing the XUL), right-click editing of bookmarks from within the bookmark menu, etc. But the Mozilla.org staff seems determined to resist these types of features, describing them as "bloat."
As far as:
but because it has a strong "add-on" extension mechanism.
I think that's great. And if the net result is that somebody can take Phoenix, and more easily add the types of features I described above, as a "plug-in", which can be optionally installed, then great.
What I don't get though, is how much better an extension mechanism Phoenix has, than Mozilla. People have managed to add all sorts of neat shit into Mozilla already, using whatever mechanisms are provided for doing so... don't believe me, just go browse around Mozdev for a while. Multizilla, Optimoz, Easysearch, etc. have extended Mozilla quite nicely already.
I'm tired of software developers creating an artificial hardware upgrade path for everyone to follow.
ya know, I can appreciate that not everybody can afford to rush out and buy and brand new, top of the line, 3 gigahertz machine with a gig of RAM... but the simple fact is, hardware becomes obsolete at some point, and if you want to run modern software, you have to upgrade.
How much other modern software *will* run on a 200mhz box?
in other words:
I'm tired of people with boat anchors for computers creating an artificial barrier to upgrading software for everyone to follow.
Well, as long as the new browser has all the functionality of the old one, or anything it lacks in comparison can easily be "plugged in", I won't complain.
I think the main reason this whole thing bothers me, is because it appears to be yet another symptom of the freaking incredible egotism of certain people at Mozilla.org. Some people there seem to think that they are the only ones who know what is right or proper for Mozilla, and that nobody else's opinon matters.
In fact, I get the feeling that certain Mozilla.org individuals want to drop the current browser, not for purely technical reasons, but because it has too much contribution from the community at large, as opposed to the elitists at Mozilla.
Why do I say this, well look at this quote from the roadmap:
Another example of the high cost of app-suite integration is the inherently overloaded and complicated user interface (just one example out of too many: the File / New sub-menu). The target audience of the suite was never clear, and seemed to shift back and forth with prevailing business- and voluntary-contributor-driven winds.
and this quote from Hyatt's blog:
A common question is going to be, "I want to write code! Can I help?" The quick answer is, "If we need your help, we'll ask for it." The best way you can help is by building the products, testing them, making suggestions in newsgroups and mailing lists, and filing bugs.
Sounds like they're saying in essence "we don't need no stinkin' help from voluntary contributors, just let us build what *we* want to build, and you'll like it, whether you like it or not."
This is lame. I *LIKE* the existing XPFE browser / application suite.
Phoenix is nice, the new standalone mail/news client will probably be nice as well, but I see no good reason for them to drop the application suite.
All this talk about how Mozilla is too big, too bloated, has too many features, etc., is a load of shit, IMHO. Unless you're trying to run Mozilla on a freaking Pentium 100 with 64 megs of RAM or something else antiquated like that, performance is fine. And if anything, there are still plenty of features that *should* be put into Mozilla, that the Mozilla.org folks refuse to implement, despite how many votes the RFE has, or how many people want it.
I say they should just keep developing Mozilla as it is, keep improving it, keep adding features, and let the people who want to work on Minotaur, Phoenix, whatever, do so.
Bleah.
Agreed. Python invokes horrible images of column oriented languages like RPG, in my mind. Which is why I have zero interest in learning it.
Best idea I've heard in ages. I'd considering paying for a /. sub if they'd implement this.
Great, now Sarah Brady and her idiotic minions are trolling /.
Just what we needed....
Are there any estimates as to what percentage of the space shuttle this might comprise?
/. story briefly mentions that very issue. IIRC, they said the amount of debris recovered so far, comprises about 11% of the total weight of the shuttle.
One of the articles linked from this
There are still BBS's, ya know. Even at least one that can be accessed via IP over the 'net. Check out Neverending BBS for more info, or to login.
could lose their citizenship when the govt. decides to declare a group like the National Rifle Association or the Libertarian Party a "Terrorist Organization?"
Do you suppose they have any documented guidelines for deciding when to classify a group as "terrorist?" If so, are these guidelines available to the public? If not, why not? Time for an FOIA request? Is the decision made by one person (The President) or by Congress or what? Can such a decision be appealed in court? Do the "accused" get the benefit of "due process?"
Hmmm... Food for thought, isn't it?
Does anybody consider that if we continue to fight terrorism the way Bu$h and his outlaw cowboy posse thinks we should, there will be MORE terrorism, not less.
Yes, exactly. Thank you, finally somebody on Slashdot who knows what the fuck they're talking about.
But I don't understand how the 'USA PATRIOT Act' or attacking Iraq will do anything to make me safer.
That's because it won't. The "USA Patriot Act II" and attacking Iraq will in fact, do much to make you LESS safe.
What party has as one of its main issues being the safeguarding of our rights and constitution?
The Libertarian Party is exactly what you're looking for. Go to their website, read the platform, and see what you think.
I think that might be the single most "insightful" post I've ever read on Slashdot. Ever. Period.
When they came for the Jews, I didn't care becuase I wasn't Jewish...
When they came for the Catholics, I didn't care because I wasn't Catholic...
When they came for me, there wasn't anybody left to care...
No, it's not premature. It's never too early to start worrying about protecting our civil liberties. You can believe my Congressional representatives are going to be receiving letters and phone calls about this, starting next week.
I do believe I hear "a revolution calling....."
Why should a single person who has never missed a payment, never been late, never screwed anyone over by not paying back borrowed money and has a 12-month nest egg that he has painstakingly assembled be treated the same as the majority of people who live pay check to pay check, overspend their income, and do not act with restraint and discipline?
If you're asking that in the context of the story, that is in relation to getting hired for a job, I'll tell you why.... because all of that stuff, while nice, has nothing, zero, zilch, nada to do with a potential employee's suitability for a job.
I predict that it will fail. UnitedLinux and their psudeo open-source approach is going to flop miserably, and probably take ruin SuSE, SCO, Turbo and Connectiva in the process.
Just my opinion, but I don't think that this approach of mixing closed source stuff and open source stuff, and then trying to slap a per-seat license fee on the whole mess, is going to catch on. This is the same reason that I don't expect anything to come of SuSE's so called "Exchange killer." I think people either want (true) open source, or they'd just as soon go with something proprietary anyway.
Let's get the biggest /. effect of all time going, people... I want her server to overload to the point that it catches fire and burns here nice 6 bedroom spam mansion to the dirt....
http://www.dataresourceconsulting.com/
Are you kidding? Just every story? ef that... this link, http://www.dataresourceconsulting.com/ /. front page, and should be automatically appended to EVERY SINGLE POST posted on /. from now until the end of time.
should be permanent link off the
Agreed. Now, how do we get IBM to release a nice generic PPC based motherboard, in an ATX form factor, with PCI slots, using regular PC memory, blah, blah...
If it was easy to build a machine based on a fundamentally different architecture, without being forced to pay the big bucks for an RS/6000, a Sun Sparc box, etc, then I bet Linux / BSD / Hurd / Etc. on those platforms could really take off.
Simple dress and presentation codes exist for reasons that are easily understood by most 5 year-olds.
The "reasons" you speak of may be easily understood by a 5 year old... but the difference between the 5 year old and an adult is that the adult knows that the reasons are actually bullshit.