3) I really doubt you are going to make any ranking system work. It would be chaos considering this country has trouble just counting a simple vote for a candidate. Stick with the system proven in every other country in the world everyone gets on the first ballot and a run off between the top two candidates if no one wins 50% in the first ballot.
While I agree a ranking system might be too tough to make work in the short term, I'm pretty sure that you can implement Approval voting without too much of a hitch. After all most people are already familiar with it because of American Idol.
For at least Oracle, you want to normalize your case (usually to lowercase) because the sql cache is case sensitive, and it's harder to remember which words to upcase rather than just uniformly saying just downcase everything.
Probably want to send and email over to the guys on comp.software.config-mgmt, I'm sure they are going to want to hear they've been using the wrong acronym all this time.
Yeah, it's the correct acronym, (Software Configuration Management (I don't get it either)).
I've used a bunch of them over the years, it's a bit of a hobby for me. I won't try to do a comparison of them all, there's one
here. But I'll give some general impressions. BK is definetely the best of the bunch so far. The distributed nature, the solid tools around it, the don't lose any piece of change data philosophy.
I've been on an Arch kick though, it follows the same principles, distributed repositories and all that, but there aren't as many tools around for it quite yet, but I think it's building a community around it. There are some idiosynchrocies that bug me though.
Still haven't gotten around to playing with Subversion, it just didn't seem ambitious enough for me to bother with.
Perforce and CVS are the other ones I have the most experience with. They are pretty typical for a client-server type model of SCM, with Perforce being well supported on the commercial end. That external database gets large and slow though if your tree gets too big.
The reading from the source or writing to the target would need to take longer than the life of the source media. The speed of the transfer is also an issue. I don't see why any of these factors are dependent on the how fast things could be written to the source.
As in, it takes me 3 minutes to burn an audio CD, but 60 minutes to play it through my CD player and record it to tape. (Contrived example)
I definetely like the feature set, which is why it initially attracted me. One question though, I would mostly use a DAP when walking (briskly) around or at the gym (not on a treadmill though). Will it skip during these activities? I think I may be better off going with a flash player with my needs.
I was all set to go and plunge into the Rio Karma world, but my one hesitation is all the horror stories with the hard drive. Everyone on www.riovolution.com agree that you must buy the Karma with an extended warranty, because of the hard drive problem. Once you figure that in ($40 at BB, $60 at CC), the price starts to creep back up into iPod land.
Whose firmware are you running now? I googled and found that the DLink704 is the same amit box as yours, but looking on the amit site, I couldn't find any firmware upgrades.
Christ, read the damn paper, these guys are just doing research, for the purpose of advancing knowledge. As well as pointing out a way that information can be leaked they also provide suggestions for remedies.
They aren't doing it to make your life harder, you egomaniac.
I didn't believe your numbers, so I also did an informal test on my machine. I used one of the old Oracle docs, 1.5 megs. Same methodology as yours.
IE pulled up the page in about 3 seconds. Mozilla, and Phoenix took about 18 seconds.
In any case, mozilla pulled up the incremental version quickly, so the page was immediately readable. I actually think that mozilla probable did too much incremental refreshes, causing alot of slow down.
In any case, I've been using mozilla as my primary browser since the M15 release or so. The rendering speed doesn't really matter except in pathological cases of database docs;) Most of the pages load in the background tabs anyhow nowadays.
I've used Perforce and CVS extensively, and played around alot with BK. Perforce, while definetely nicer that CVS, is IMHO inferior to BK. Some of this are inherent limitation of the strongly server-client architecture of perforce, others has to do with some bad design decisions.
Some examples (some of these don't apply to the open source world):
Perforce does not solve the number 1 complaint about CVS, file renaming. They talk about a workaround that is to branch the file so as to not lose file history, but that does not help when you do a source reorg on a major revision, and want to be able to patch fixes from the previous revisions.
Perforce forces you to use their (limited) server based diffs when comparing versions against each other.
Disconnected operations is a real pain with Perforce. It just needs to have the server around all the time.
Perforce does not have a good failover solution. You only have to your last backup, add the IP based server license to that, and the disconnected operation problems, and you will end up having some downtime if you server machine goes down. BK, to be fair, also does not seem to have a true failover system either, but it seems like you can pretty easily have a secondary system that does pulls very often, that will be ready to go at a moments notice. Also since it is built to be disconnected, having the top level repository around is not essential.
Perforces protection systems is awfully kludgey, I mean there is no seperation of administration operations to data operations, and any complex tree will have ugly ass permissions (and you can't even comment the protections file, because it's stored in some server form and recreated every time you change it, blech). Again BK also doesn't really have protections built into it, but by its design you could at least limit access to repositories through the OS level (which arguably is better anyway).
If Neal Stephenson is to be believed in Cryptonomicon, Turing used information theory to only use just enough secret information that would be attributable to chance.
Cut him a little slack. I don't know the numbers but I'm willing to assume that most of slashdot's users are american, and though there are 4 timezones (in the 48 states), they are earlier, so his point about people being asleep is valid.
Yes Hawaii and Alaska have their own timezones. Actually I think Alaska has 4 natural timezones, but they only use 2.
Just to clarify Matt's comments, please take a look at the schema . Every comment is a long_desc, and is kept in a different record. Also please note the bugs_activity table, this is an audit table and notes every change that a bug goes through. I'm not sure about mozilla, but for our local installation, this table is at least 10x the number of bugs.
Other tables with a many to one relation to bugs are CC, keywords, votes, and attachments. So Matt's numbers are very reasonable.
CVS lacks a few features that make it really uncomfortable to work with.
-atomic checkins on multiple files: basically meaning that you can't really tell what files came in with each checkin, so backing out of a change is a chore, also it's possible to checkin
only a part of what wanted to (if the network goes down) resulting in a broken tree
-file renaming breaks file history
-no directory renaming
-no disconnected operations on the repository(e.g. checking the file history when you are on a laptop in a plane)
-branching and multiple merges back into the trunk is a little awkward
-setting up a staging area for integration of changes is similarly awkward
The alternatives:
Bitkeeper looks really nice, I've only played with it though, not used it in any serious development. It follows a model that every developer gets his own repository, and then push changes around these repositories. The license allows access to the source code, but is not quite open.
A lot of people like Perforce. I don't have much experience with it myself though.
Visual SourceSafe is slow over the network, seems to corrupt files easily, and not so friendly cross platform. It has a nice GUI, if you are into that kind of stuff. Has similar problems with CVS regarding branching and atomic transactions.
ClearCase is really expensive(in computing resources, money, and adminstration costs). On the other hand it has nice integration with rational's workflow and bug tracking products.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree a ranking system might be too tough to make work in the short term, I'm pretty sure that you can implement Approval voting without too much of a hitch. After all most people are already familiar with it because of American Idol.
For at least Oracle, you want to normalize your case (usually to lowercase) because the sql cache is case sensitive, and it's harder to remember which words to upcase rather than just uniformly saying just downcase everything.
Don't tell me, tell these guys:
Bitkeeper
Perforce
Clearcase
(Look at the titles)
Probably want to send and email over to the guys on comp.software.config-mgmt, I'm sure they are going to want to hear they've been using the wrong acronym all this time.
Yeah, it's the correct acronym, (Software Configuration Management (I don't get it either)).
I've used a bunch of them over the years, it's a bit of a hobby for me. I won't try to do a comparison of them all, there's one
here. But I'll give some general impressions. BK is definetely the best of the bunch so far. The distributed nature, the solid tools around it, the don't lose any piece of change data philosophy.
I've been on an Arch kick though, it follows the same principles, distributed repositories and all that, but there aren't as many tools around for it quite yet, but I think it's building a community around it. There are some idiosynchrocies that bug me though.
Still haven't gotten around to playing with Subversion, it just didn't seem ambitious enough for me to bother with.
Perforce and CVS are the other ones I have the most experience with. They are pretty typical for a client-server type model of SCM, with Perforce being well supported on the commercial end. That external database gets large and slow though if your tree gets too big.
To nitpick the nitpicker:
The reading from the source or writing to the target would need to take longer than the life of the source media. The speed of the transfer is also an issue. I don't see why any of these factors are dependent on the how fast things could be written to the source.
As in, it takes me 3 minutes to burn an audio CD, but 60 minutes to play it through my CD player and record it to tape. (Contrived example)
I definetely like the feature set, which is why it initially attracted me. One question though, I would mostly use a DAP when walking (briskly) around or at the gym (not on a treadmill though). Will it skip during these activities? I think I may be better off going with a flash player with my needs.
I was all set to go and plunge into the Rio Karma world, but my one hesitation is all the horror stories with the hard drive. Everyone on www.riovolution.com agree that you must buy the Karma with an extended warranty, because of the hard drive problem. Once you figure that in ($40 at BB, $60 at CC), the price starts to creep back up into iPod land.
The commentary track on 'Blood Simple' is funny (until the gag gets played out).
This is the original poster's point. Do it if you would find it fun, don't do it just for the money.
Whose firmware are you running now? I googled and found that the DLink704 is the same amit box as yours, but looking on the amit site, I couldn't find any firmware upgrades.
Oh come on, he was just saying what everyone else was thinking ;)
Christ, read the damn paper, these guys are just doing research, for the purpose of advancing knowledge. As well as pointing out a way that information can be leaked they also provide suggestions for remedies.
They aren't doing it to make your life harder, you egomaniac.
Or to make it even more obvious, counter starts at 0, each player adds 1 to the counter, and the winner is the player who puts the counter over 1.
I didn't believe your numbers, so I also did an informal test on my machine. I used one of the old Oracle docs, 1.5 megs. Same methodology as yours.
;) Most of the pages load in the background tabs anyhow nowadays.
IE pulled up the page in about 3 seconds. Mozilla, and Phoenix took about 18 seconds.
In any case, mozilla pulled up the incremental version quickly, so the page was immediately readable. I actually think that mozilla probable did too much incremental refreshes, causing alot of slow down.
In any case, I've been using mozilla as my primary browser since the M15 release or so. The rendering speed doesn't really matter except in pathological cases of database docs
Apparently not as fast as you are to condemn them, because they mentioned the previous slashdot article in this one.
I've used Perforce and CVS extensively, and played around alot with BK. Perforce, while definetely nicer that CVS, is IMHO inferior to BK. Some of this are inherent limitation of the strongly server-client architecture of perforce, others has to do with some bad design decisions.
Some examples (some of these don't apply to the open source world):
Perforce does not solve the number 1 complaint about CVS, file renaming. They talk about a workaround that is to branch the file so as to not lose file history, but that does not help when you do a source reorg on a major revision, and want to be able to patch fixes from the previous revisions.
Perforce forces you to use their (limited) server based diffs when comparing versions against each other.
Disconnected operations is a real pain with Perforce. It just needs to have the server around all the time.
Perforce does not have a good failover solution. You only have to your last backup, add the IP based server license to that, and the disconnected operation problems, and you will end up having some downtime if you server machine goes down. BK, to be fair, also does not seem to have a true failover system either, but it seems like you can pretty easily have a secondary system that does pulls very often, that will be ready to go at a moments notice. Also since it is built to be disconnected, having the top level repository around is not essential.
Perforces protection systems is awfully kludgey, I mean there is no seperation of administration operations to data operations, and any complex tree will have ugly ass permissions (and you can't even comment the protections file, because it's stored in some server form and recreated every time you change it, blech). Again BK also doesn't really have protections built into it, but by its design you could at least limit access to repositories through the OS level (which arguably is better anyway).
If Neal Stephenson is to be believed in Cryptonomicon, Turing used information theory to only use just enough secret information that would be attributable to chance.
Cut him a little slack. I don't know the numbers but I'm willing to assume that most of slashdot's users are american, and though there are 4 timezones (in the 48 states), they are earlier, so his point about people being asleep is valid.
Yes Hawaii and Alaska have their own timezones. Actually I think Alaska has 4 natural timezones, but they only use 2.
Just to clarify Matt's comments, please take a look at the schema . Every comment is a long_desc, and is kept in a different record. Also please note the bugs_activity table, this is an audit table and notes every change that a bug goes through. I'm not sure about mozilla, but for our local installation, this table is at least 10x the number of bugs.
Other tables with a many to one relation to bugs are CC, keywords, votes, and attachments. So Matt's numbers are very reasonable.
http://www.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=13 0.49.77.223
Somewhere in Pitt, i don't get it either.
How come we haven't seen quickies in a long time?
Not sure what you mean by 'fixing the wheel scrolling', but if you can turn off the smooth scrolling bullshit in tools->internet options->advanced.
CVS lacks a few features that make it really uncomfortable to work with.
-atomic checkins on multiple files: basically meaning that you can't really tell what files came in with each checkin, so backing out of a change is a chore, also it's possible to checkin
only a part of what wanted to (if the network goes down) resulting in a broken tree
-file renaming breaks file history
-no directory renaming
-no disconnected operations on the repository(e.g. checking the file history when you are on a laptop in a plane)
-branching and multiple merges back into the trunk is a little awkward
-setting up a staging area for integration of changes is similarly awkward
The alternatives:
Bitkeeper looks really nice, I've only played with it though, not used it in any serious development. It follows a model that every developer gets his own repository, and then push changes around these repositories. The license allows access to the source code, but is not quite open.
A lot of people like Perforce. I don't have much experience with it myself though.
Visual SourceSafe is slow over the network, seems to corrupt files easily, and not so friendly cross platform. It has a nice GUI, if you are into that kind of stuff. Has similar problems with CVS regarding branching and atomic transactions.
ClearCase is really expensive(in computing resources, money, and adminstration costs). On the other hand it has nice integration with rational's workflow and bug tracking products.
The applicable parts of the TCPA are outlined here.
IANAL but it seems like a2 would make it illegal.
Junkbusters has good information about telemarketers and protecting yourself.
Sounds alot like stow. I haven't played around with it though, but it looks like its been around forever.