I agree, nobody should be forced to contribute to an open source project. But then again, I think there is a certail level of honour that the developers of a larger project (such as KOffice or KDE) must show. That's not to say that they have to suck up to their users, or anything of that sort. What they should not do, however, is blatantly insult users in public while mentioning their contributions to said projects.
There's a minimum standard, and that particular developer sunk below it in that particular instance. Intentional or not, it did reflect poorly on the entire project, including all of those individuals who have been extremely helpful in the past. If anything, such insults are more disrespectful to those with the KDE project who have helped built its fantastic image, rather than to the person the insults were directed towards.
Can anyone shed some light on Matt Asay's credentials and achievements? Has he made any significant open source contributions, be them in the form of code, documentation, icons, etc.? What is his background, and past involvement with the open source community. His name isn't one that rings a bell, so that's why I'm wondering who exactly he is.
Is he a master contributor such as Bruce Perens, or is he more of an Eric S. Raymond?
Questioning things is an excellent thing to do. I wish that more people did it more often.
However, in this case the questioning was based on a complete lack of understanding. Now, I don't have much of a problem with that. That's fine. It's when people provide stupid alternatives that I take offense.
It was, like it or not, stupid to suggest that the design be scrapped and replaced with a large garage funnel.
I would like it if he did an analysis of professionalism in the open source world. As open source software starts to play a greater role in business and enterprise computing, it will soon be expected that the open source developers gain a certain level of professionalism.
Indeed, many have been able to do so. They present a very respectable, reputable and trustworthy image. Yet sometimes that isn't the case. There was the recent incident of a KOffice developer publically insulting a longtime KDE and KOffice user, for instance. Such incidents make executives question the professionalism of the entire open source community, even if it is just a lone rogue developer acting unprofessionally.
I think my children, the ones who were the result of my penis penetrating my wife's vagina and depositing sperm in her uterus and Fallopian tubes multiple times, would object to your accusations.:)
You want to balance your budget? I'm sorry to tell you, but the current administration has overspent so fucking much in the last half-decade that it'll probably take you guys decades to just break even again. And that's assuming you stop all useless spending now. Chances are that won't happen, and you'll be paying interest out the asshole for decades.
The cost is irrelevant. Microsoft provides Internet Explorer for free, too. And the documentation for their MSHTML control is superb. I would expect the Mozilla group to be able to provide similar, if not better, documentation.
In the case of Mozilla, it would greatly benefit them if their product were to be embedded all over the place. Of course, non-Mozilla developers need solid documentation and solid examples in order to learn how to embed Gecko. Such documentation and examples currently do not exist.
The same goes for OpenOffice. If these products want to be seriously used, then they will need to provide sufficient documentation. It's as simple as that. The price they're charging for their software is irrelevant.
Indeed, if I were an American that is what I would fear.
Right now we don't have the technology to visit such places. But in perhaps 20 or 30 years we might. That's really not a very long time, all things considered. And with the pro-religion, anti-scientific stance of the current American administration, there's a very good chance that it won't be Americans visiting these planets for the first time. It may very well be the Chinese getting there first, just because they didn't let religion interfere with their technological progress.
Yeah, I thought you'd give a moronic answer like that. Please come back when you have some experience designing complex equipment.
If they're going with a flower-shaped design, then there's most likely a very good reason for it. Considering that these people are far more intelligent than you, your idea is worthless.
Any true American should care. After all, it is their children and grandchildren who many not receive a full education due to the religious beliefs of a small group of extremists. And in the world economy of today and most likely tomorrow, they will need to have such knowledge to just get by, let alone succeed.
Powerful religious groups can often have a profound impact upon the development and progress of a nation.
How will the religious establishment react to such discoveries? Suppose a distant planet with many of the features of earth (oceans, deserts, mountains, etc.) is found. But let's not go so far as to say that plant life (or something like it) is found.
How would the religious establishment react? Such discoveries would, in effect, refute many of the religious claims.
We have already seen pseudo Christians going to extreme lengths to ban the teaching of evolution in places like Kansas and Tennessee. Would they take a similar route were discoveries that didn't mesh to well with their teachings to be found?
No, Teri, it doesn't. When I discuss "pornography", I always mean the most hardcore smut you can think of. I'm talking about quadruple anal penetration. Yes, four cocks in one woman's tight cunt.
Except in the cases of Mozilla and OpenOffice.org, they're not just your typical open source project. They're constantly billed as "Microsoft killers". Considering their corporate backing, such projects should be able to offer far better documentation. I'm sure Sun or AOL could spare a developer for a few days to write some decent documentation. The benefits of such documentation may far exceed the initial costs.
Why do you have to wait until some specific version is released? Most major open source projects make frequent builds available of their development sources or before stable releases. Go ahead and use the betas or pre-release builds. Chances are the quality is suitable enough for you.
It's not just the OpenOffice project that suffers from a complete lack of quality developer documentation. I recently was doing some work with embedding Mozilla's Gecko engine, and I ran into the same problems that you did. Assuming you can even find documentation, it is often years old and out of date. Sure, there are examples, but they're horribly commented and not very useful to learn from.
We don't have time to go digging through the Mozilla source to find out each and every little nuance that wasn't mentioned in the three-year-old documentation. So please, Mozilla and OpenOffice.org developers, provide us with some recent, useful documentation and examples! That is perhaps the greatest favour you could do at this time.
How does a skateboarder or a kangaroo on a pogo stick increase my productivity in any way? Sure, I imagine it's entertaining for about two or three seconds. But I fail to see any benefit to such capabilities. I mean, it won't make the signal clearer. It will probably just consume the battery. It won't get me to my meetings faster.
Why has everyone suddenly gone googoo over XML? As all this interoperability nonsense shows, it often is far from the perfect solution.
At the firm I used to work at we had a rather sane policy: send short memos as plain text files, and larger documents as PDFs. Of course, the PDFs were generated via LaTeX, so the LaTeX source to the document could also be sent, too. We didn't have to worry about all this crap with MS Office.
We'd often hear stories from new employees about the troubles they'd gone through with documents at their previous place of employment. So we were always quite glad that we avoided all that. It does take some time to use LaTeX, for instance, but after the initial learning curve (which is far shallower for most people than is widely thought) its users were far more productive.
What is the GUI architecture of the 2.x series like? Are they still using their own home-brewed GUI toolkit, or have they transitioned it to be a wrapper around Qt, GTK+, Win32, etc.?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, nobody should be forced to contribute to an open source project. But then again, I think there is a certail level of honour that the developers of a larger project (such as KOffice or KDE) must show. That's not to say that they have to suck up to their users, or anything of that sort. What they should not do, however, is blatantly insult users in public while mentioning their contributions to said projects.
There's a minimum standard, and that particular developer sunk below it in that particular instance. Intentional or not, it did reflect poorly on the entire project, including all of those individuals who have been extremely helpful in the past. If anything, such insults are more disrespectful to those with the KDE project who have helped built its fantastic image, rather than to the person the insults were directed towards.
Can anyone shed some light on Matt Asay's credentials and achievements? Has he made any significant open source contributions, be them in the form of code, documentation, icons, etc.? What is his background, and past involvement with the open source community. His name isn't one that rings a bell, so that's why I'm wondering who exactly he is.
Is he a master contributor such as Bruce Perens, or is he more of an Eric S. Raymond?
I accept your apology. Now please, try to refrain from such mistakes in the future. Good day!
Questioning things is an excellent thing to do. I wish that more people did it more often.
However, in this case the questioning was based on a complete lack of understanding. Now, I don't have much of a problem with that. That's fine. It's when people provide stupid alternatives that I take offense.
It was, like it or not, stupid to suggest that the design be scrapped and replaced with a large garage funnel.
I would like it if he did an analysis of professionalism in the open source world. As open source software starts to play a greater role in business and enterprise computing, it will soon be expected that the open source developers gain a certain level of professionalism.
Indeed, many have been able to do so. They present a very respectable, reputable and trustworthy image. Yet sometimes that isn't the case. There was the recent incident of a KOffice developer publically insulting a longtime KDE and KOffice user, for instance. Such incidents make executives question the professionalism of the entire open source community, even if it is just a lone rogue developer acting unprofessionally.
Why are you looking for strip clubs? Don't you have a girlfriend who puts out? Or are you one of those nerds who will never get the pussy?
The word is "pedantic", not "pendantic".
I think my children, the ones who were the result of my penis penetrating my wife's vagina and depositing sperm in her uterus and Fallopian tubes multiple times, would object to your accusations. :)
You want to balance your budget? I'm sorry to tell you, but the current administration has overspent so fucking much in the last half-decade that it'll probably take you guys decades to just break even again. And that's assuming you stop all useless spending now. Chances are that won't happen, and you'll be paying interest out the asshole for decades.
You obviously didn't get the point. You fucking failed. And you failed badly.
The cost is irrelevant. Microsoft provides Internet Explorer for free, too. And the documentation for their MSHTML control is superb. I would expect the Mozilla group to be able to provide similar, if not better, documentation.
In the case of Mozilla, it would greatly benefit them if their product were to be embedded all over the place. Of course, non-Mozilla developers need solid documentation and solid examples in order to learn how to embed Gecko. Such documentation and examples currently do not exist.
The same goes for OpenOffice. If these products want to be seriously used, then they will need to provide sufficient documentation. It's as simple as that. The price they're charging for their software is irrelevant.
Indeed, if I were an American that is what I would fear.
Right now we don't have the technology to visit such places. But in perhaps 20 or 30 years we might. That's really not a very long time, all things considered. And with the pro-religion, anti-scientific stance of the current American administration, there's a very good chance that it won't be Americans visiting these planets for the first time. It may very well be the Chinese getting there first, just because they didn't let religion interfere with their technological progress.
Yeah, I thought you'd give a moronic answer like that. Please come back when you have some experience designing complex equipment.
If they're going with a flower-shaped design, then there's most likely a very good reason for it. Considering that these people are far more intelligent than you, your idea is worthless.
Any true American should care. After all, it is their children and grandchildren who many not receive a full education due to the religious beliefs of a small group of extremists. And in the world economy of today and most likely tomorrow, they will need to have such knowledge to just get by, let alone succeed.
Powerful religious groups can often have a profound impact upon the development and progress of a nation.
What other shape do you propose? Remember, it must be able to funnel light.
How will the religious establishment react to such discoveries? Suppose a distant planet with many of the features of earth (oceans, deserts, mountains, etc.) is found. But let's not go so far as to say that plant life (or something like it) is found.
How would the religious establishment react? Such discoveries would, in effect, refute many of the religious claims.
We have already seen pseudo Christians going to extreme lengths to ban the teaching of evolution in places like Kansas and Tennessee. Would they take a similar route were discoveries that didn't mesh to well with their teachings to be found?
No, Teri, it doesn't. When I discuss "pornography", I always mean the most hardcore smut you can think of. I'm talking about quadruple anal penetration. Yes, four cocks in one woman's tight cunt.
Except in the cases of Mozilla and OpenOffice.org, they're not just your typical open source project. They're constantly billed as "Microsoft killers". Considering their corporate backing, such projects should be able to offer far better documentation. I'm sure Sun or AOL could spare a developer for a few days to write some decent documentation. The benefits of such documentation may far exceed the initial costs.
I wouldn't mind seeing a woman's pussy or asshole getting fucked by a 16" black cock while I'm riding the tube.
Why do you have to wait until some specific version is released? Most major open source projects make frequent builds available of their development sources or before stable releases. Go ahead and use the betas or pre-release builds. Chances are the quality is suitable enough for you.
Has anyone begun selling Video iPod pornography yet?
It's not just the OpenOffice project that suffers from a complete lack of quality developer documentation. I recently was doing some work with embedding Mozilla's Gecko engine, and I ran into the same problems that you did. Assuming you can even find documentation, it is often years old and out of date. Sure, there are examples, but they're horribly commented and not very useful to learn from.
We don't have time to go digging through the Mozilla source to find out each and every little nuance that wasn't mentioned in the three-year-old documentation. So please, Mozilla and OpenOffice.org developers, provide us with some recent, useful documentation and examples! That is perhaps the greatest favour you could do at this time.
How does a skateboarder or a kangaroo on a pogo stick increase my productivity in any way? Sure, I imagine it's entertaining for about two or three seconds. But I fail to see any benefit to such capabilities. I mean, it won't make the signal clearer. It will probably just consume the battery. It won't get me to my meetings faster.
Why has everyone suddenly gone googoo over XML? As all this interoperability nonsense shows, it often is far from the perfect solution.
At the firm I used to work at we had a rather sane policy: send short memos as plain text files, and larger documents as PDFs. Of course, the PDFs were generated via LaTeX, so the LaTeX source to the document could also be sent, too. We didn't have to worry about all this crap with MS Office.
We'd often hear stories from new employees about the troubles they'd gone through with documents at their previous place of employment. So we were always quite glad that we avoided all that. It does take some time to use LaTeX, for instance, but after the initial learning curve (which is far shallower for most people than is widely thought) its users were far more productive.
What is the GUI architecture of the 2.x series like? Are they still using their own home-brewed GUI toolkit, or have they transitioned it to be a wrapper around Qt, GTK+, Win32, etc.?