Jim Gettys :
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5 have made/are
making web technology based applications finally competitive with those
built using conventional toolkits such as Qt, GTK+, and the Windows and Mac
equivalents.
Clearly, Web UI technologies offers a commodized
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 21:31 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Jim Gettys j...@freedesktop.org wrote:
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5
have made/are making web technology based applications finally
competitive with
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 08:46 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5 have
made/are making web technology based applications finally competitive
with those built using conventional toolkits such as Qt, GTK+, and the
Windows and
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:51 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
It is becoming feasible to build applications with those technologies
that you *can* take with you. In this sense, they become no different
than software we currently install in conventional ways based on GTK+;
just more convenient.
This discussion is not contributing to the original point of this email
thread - the strategic goals for GNOME.
I agree with you, but those who are attacked in the list have a right
to respond to defend themselves, and sometimes it is necessary. In
this case the FSF was attacked.
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 08:15 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
Philip Van Hoof wrote:
Doing some more [CUT]ing.
In other words:
UI and client developers should learn to build state machines instead of
threads that work like (where [...] is ~ an IP frame):
[ask], wait, [receive], process,
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 02:51 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
See http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono for details.
That article is a load of crap, a package of half truths.
You are entitled to your opinion, but I think you're wrong.
I invite people to read it and judge for
Thanks for restarting this discussion Dave. This is my first post to the
foundation list. Hi all! :)
snip
Proposed community mantra: Beautiful computing freedom
/snip
snip
The thing about a vision is that it easily makes it easier for you to
choose the right path at the fork in the road.
The point I was trying to make was that HTML 5 (or more formally some
of the API's for javascript for accessing local storage), among other
things, enables offline use of web applications.
This sounds both interesting and dangerous. Maybe it would let you
explicitly install a
Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:51 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
I'm doing a huge [CUT] here, I hope you don't mind?
People like Google work *hard* on latency and understand
every byte counts (among many other things: go look at the google talks
by their engineers on the topic).
See http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono for details.
That article is a load of crap, a package of half truths.
You are entitled to your opinion, but I think you're wrong.
I invite people to read it and judge for themselves.
Some of the points in the article -- not all -- deal with
It is not a matter of ostracizing anyone. We are glad that they use
GNOME, but we must not say we are entirely happy about them as long as
they contain non-free programs.
But we are closely associated with these organizations. (Your original email
said we should make
Sorry for intruding again, but it was recommended to me that I could
post this message. It was a sidenote on Philip Van Hoof's message,
regarding the promotion of GtkBuilder.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:07 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
I hope you guys really don't write the XML by hand now.)
No,
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 21:24 -0500, Jud Craft wrote:
Hey Jud,
Sorry for intruding again, but it was recommended to me that I could
post this message. It was a sidenote on Philip Van Hoof's message,
regarding the promotion of GtkBuilder.
Although the atmosphere just recovered from being
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 11:08 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
We debaters should decrease our traffic on this mailing list
No. Stubborn people who insist on having the last word should stop
pointless arguments. It's bad enough when people think they can have a
conversation with one of you. It's
The point I was trying to make was that HTML 5 (or more formally some
of the API's for javascript for accessing local storage), among other
things, enables offline use of web applications. Think google gears
use in google calendar and gmail or google air. Note gears was just
formally
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:51 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
I'm doing a huge [CUT] here, I hope you don't mind?
People like Google work *hard* on latency and understand
every byte counts (among many other things: go look at the google talks
by their engineers on the topic).
In my opinion you
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:32 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 11:08 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
We debaters should decrease our traffic on this mailing list
No. Stubborn people who insist on having the last word should stop
pointless arguments. It's bad enough when people
In my opinion you solve latency more by making services capable of
pipelining, than by compressing data. And by making clients that make
use of the remote service's pipelining capabilities.
Thats a bit naïve. They two solve totally different problems and it is
dependant upon the behaviour of
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:42 +, Alan Cox wrote:
In my opinion you solve latency more by making services capable of
pipelining, than by compressing data. And by making clients that make
use of the remote service's pipelining capabilities.
Thats a bit naïve. They two solve totally
Hi Jim,
Actually at Igalia we share your view and concerns, and this is one of the
reasons why we are putting a lot of effort into bringing modern and solid
web technologies to the heart of GNOME, being WebKitGTK+ one of the
key components that can enable the integration that you mention.
Br,
sillies :-) Lets not forget some of the low-level sillies found in the
kernel and base-syste, recently: software resume processes that
synchronously read huge chunks of the swap partition to checksum the
disk, single big kernel locks held for all module insertions,
Modules is not showing up
On 3/4/10 10:32 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote:
Well, given this wide coverage, which I've somehow completely missed, there
shouldn't be much challenge to your producing an actual citation
I was a little looser than I should have been in my wording.
Oh, indeed?
For media
On 3/5/10 8:18 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote:
Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org writes:
the answer is [] not [] :avoid anything that runs on a server.
No one's suggested that.
Let's not be in a rush to invite users to use servers -- even our own
-- instead of their own
On 3/5/10 8:44 AM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote:
If everything gets done inside or through your browser, it would make
toolkits such as GTK and desktop environments such as GNOME obsolete,
except as platforms for a browser.
Just so we're completely clear here, I'd suggest that
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 09:05 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
On 3/5/10 8:44 AM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote:
If everything gets done inside or through your browser, it would make
toolkits such as GTK and desktop environments such as GNOME obsolete,
except as platforms for a
On 3/5/10 9:19 AM, Jonathon Jongsma jonat...@quotidian.org wrote:
With all of the recent comments about how horrible foundation-list has
become,
and how people are unsubscribing because of endless and
pointless
argumentation, you *still* can't get yourself to refrain from
adding more and
more
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
Perhaps it would have been better if someone from the Board had responded
to
the initial message from Mr. Stallman with regard to Facebook, saying
1) Attempting to rework or redefine GNOME 3 plans at this point, now that
On 3/5/10 9:55 AM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
Perhaps it would have been better if someone from the Board had responded to
the initial message from Mr. Stallman with regard to Facebook, saying
1)
2010/3/5 Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org
Because I shouldn't have to. More to the point, why didn't _you_?
I didn't think it was necessary as I thought it was rather obvious. But if
you thought it was necessary, as a member of the GNOME community, you should
have said it rather than taking us
Synchronizing and sharing the notes are not SaaS, though editing might
be SaaS. So at least some of this service is basically ok, provided
Gnote can also use it (because Tomboy's dependence on C# is a problem).
Again, I must certainly be missing something here, but if C# represents
such
On 3/5/10 10:18 AM, Miguel de Icaza mig...@novell.com wrote:
I could help Richard and we could work together, but he has decided
that I am a traitor of the movement.
Thanks for posting this, Miguel. It would seem to confirm that I'm not
incorrect in finding this baffling.
As someone who's
I'm quietly here reading this thread, because I'm not a Gnome
contributor (at least with code) or foundation member, just an user,
but after the latest posts I really think that now the thread missed
completly its point and really became just something against RMS. My
two cents.
Regarding Facebook's connections with the CIA, see
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook.
The Guardian is a major UK newspaper.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
I wrote:
Let's not be in a rush to invite users to use servers -- even our own
-- instead of their own computers. That is the wrong direction to go.
I chose those words carefully. They do not say we should eliminate
all servers; I don't think that. For some purposes, servers are the
Maemo/Moblin/MeeGo use GNOME and we are proud of that. Of course, we always
encourage organizations and projects to use more free software but we should
not ostracise them because they don't use 100% free software.
It is not a matter of ostracizing anyone. We are glad that they use
I explained in Gran Canaria that supporting C# is useful but depending
on it is risky. Thus, developing programs such as Mono and DotGNU is
fine, but we should not write applications in C#. For explanation of
these points, see http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono.
This is why GNOME
If GNOME is planning to operate servers, GNOME needs to consider
when it is good or bad to encourage people to use servers.
In the US, if you receive a subpoena to hand over data, you have the
opportunity to plead in court to quash or reduce the subpoena.
Success is not guaranteed; the court may
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
Maemo/Moblin/MeeGo use GNOME and we are proud of that. Of course, we
always
encourage organizations and projects to use more free software but we
should
not ostracise them because they don't use 100% free software.
Regarding Facebook's connections with the CIA, see
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/14/facebook.
The Guardian is a major UK newspaper.
Maybe I am not too bright, but I failed to see the close ties that
you quoted in your original message on February 26th.
It has a lot of
C# the language, and the core .NET libraries are under a
far-from-ideal Community Promise patent license. Sadly, this patent
grant for the ideas embodied in those standards are made available by
Microsoft to full implementations of C# and those core class
libraries. But they
Hello,
That subset is not enough: programs such as Tomboy depend on the other
libraries which are not in the ECMA subset and not covered. Also,
that community promise, even where it does apply, is not adequate.
If there was only some technique; Some sort of steps; Some sort of process
Hi,
On 3 Mar 2010, at 09:09, Dave Neary wrote:
Proposed short-to-mid-term goal: Make the GNOME platform exciting to
alpha-dog application developers thought leaders.
We probably could have had MeeGo be GNOME Mobile, but our project
wasn't the obvious place to go, because we don't seem to
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Andrew Savory wrote:
Focusing in on one area that I can talk about: Qt is perceived by some to be
stronger from a business perspective due to the 'more complete' offering:
extensive documentation and an SDK.
Perhaps more focus on and promotion of GNOME's
On 3 March 2010 22:49, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
Sugar is a good thing, but it is a different interface -- is it
connected with GNOME?
Brian Cameron rather neatly explained the technical relationship as
'they use the lower parts of the stack'.
Steve Lee
OSS Watch
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 18:46 -0500, Jud Craft wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Andrew Savory wrote:
Focusing in on one area that I can talk about: Qt is perceived by
some to be stronger from a business perspective due to the 'more
complete' offering: extensive documentation and an SDK.
Hi,
Jud Craft wrote:
In other words, I think I have to be an alpha-dog developer, and
nothing I've seen convinced me otherwise...
There's some confusion about what I meant by alpha dog developer which
I caused, obviously, so I should clear it up.
To make your platform successful as a
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5 have
made/are making web technology based applications finally competitive
with those built using conventional toolkits such as Qt, GTK+, and the
Windows and Mac equivalents.
If everything gets done inside or through
2010/3/4 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
c) Think about developing our own free web alternatives like identi.ca
did. I'd especially like to see an open alternative to Dropbox/Ubuntu One.
But there are lots and lots of web apps that people use regularly that could
use alternatives.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier j...@zonker.netwrote:
Technically, there is: iFolder. It has struggled quite a bit, but it's
still completely open and just waiting for someone to Do The Right
Thing and get it fixed up a bit and offer a service. The biggest
problem
On 3/4/10 5:46 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
If everything gets done inside or through your browser, it would make
toolkits such as GTK and desktop environments such as GNOME obsolete,
except as platforms for a browser.
And if everything gets done on your desktop, it would make
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote:
GNOME is going to host Snowy. If that works out well, I think we should look
at how we could provide hosting to other free and open web services. (It
would have to include a plan for raising money for hosting. There
On 3/4/10 7:22 AM, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier j...@zonker.net wrote:
Somewhere in there should be a self-sustaining model to raise money
for the hosting and GNOME, and provide Free as in Freedom services for
users in the bargain...
It's a nice idea, but I don't see any self-sustaining model
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
But, just so I'm sure I'm clear here, Mr. Stallman, it's my understanding
that you don't even actually _use_ the web, in any realistic sense, relying
instead on some congerie of email and a back-end rendering server to view
Hi all!
Looking at Anjuta, I have no idea if it's a great resource to start
GTK programming with or not. You say yourself presumably, and
that's the greatest nail in the coffin - you're obviously involved in
GNOME development and you have *no* idea, you're barely familiar with
it either.
On 3/4/10 9:07 AM, Gian Mario Tagliaretti gia...@gnome.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
But, just so I'm sure I'm clear here, Mr. Stallman, it's my understanding
that you don't even actually _use_ the web, in any realistic sense, relying
2010/3/4 Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org:
Now that the blood have drained from the brain cells,
Okay, just for the record, that would be an unmotivated public personal
attack here. In case anyone's keeping score. Please note that I haven't
called anyone names.
You are right, please accept my
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Gian Mario Tagliaretti gia...@gnome.org
wrote:
2010/3/4 Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org:
Now that the blood have drained from the brain cells,
Okay, just for the record, that would be an unmotivated public
personal
attack here. In case anyone's keeping score.
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 04:35 -0600, Andrew Savory wrote:
Hey Andrew,
Focussing in on one area that I can talk about: Qt is perceived by
some to be stronger from a business perspective due to the 'more
complete' offering: extensive documentation and an SDK.
Perhaps more focus on and
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
It seems to me there's a continuing need to 1) raise awareness about
GNOME, 2) raise money for GNOME, and 3) provide services around open
tools so users don't need to host their own servers, etc., to benefit
from
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:45 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
On 3/4/10 3:00 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
Let's not be in a rush to invite users to use servers -- even our own
-- instead of their own computers. That is the wrong direction to go.
[...]
I doubt that as many as 10% of
On 3/4/10 6:08 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:45 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
In any case, I'm under the impression that a search warrant or similar order
is generally required in the US to get information regardless of whether
it's from a hosted service or
Hi,
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 04:35 -0600, Andrew Savory wrote:
Hi,
snip
Focussing in on one area that I can talk about: Qt is perceived by some to be
stronger from a business perspective due to the 'more complete' offering:
extensive documentation and an SDK.
Shaun McCance and I were
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 08:08 -0600, Paul Cutler wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 04:35 -0600, Andrew Savory wrote:
Hi,
snip
Focussing in on one area that I can talk about: Qt is perceived by
some to be stronger from a business perspective due to the 'more complete'
offering:
Proposed project vision: Hidden in plain sight: Everyone using GNOME,
no-one noticing
This proposed goal might be ill-advised, because it's very good to be
noticed if one do something good. Especially for a project that needs
to attract support from people.
We probably could have
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
We probably could have had moblin be GNOME Netbook. We probably could
have had Maemo be GNOME Smartphone. Or Sugar be GNOME Education.
It is fine if they promote GNOME, but remember that Maemo contains
non-free
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 10:09 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Like I say, I'm not
happy with the vision part of this (GNOME everywhere, and invisible)
I'm not happy with the invisible part either.
We *do* compete with three other desktops: Windows, Mac OS, and KDE.
Unless people know what GNOME is,
I think there is a major inflection point underway which GNOME should
internalize.
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5 have
made/are making web technology based applications finally competitive
with those built using conventional toolkits such as Qt, GTK+, and the
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Jim Gettys j...@freedesktop.org wrote:
The combination of technologies going under the name HTML 5 have made/are
making web technology based applications finally competitive with those
built using conventional toolkits such as Qt, GTK+, and the Windows and Mac
69 matches
Mail list logo
