I meant "long live" but "love" works too.
On Aug 15, 3:29 pm, Conlan <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not a dev, but I think all the QS action happens over > here:http://code.google.com/p/blacktree-alchemy/, so you may want to look > there. > > Love live, Quicksilver! > > On Aug 14, 2:34 pm, Jordan Kay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I see...I was wrong actually, and I presumed that QSB was an > > application that it wasn't. It's nowhere near the realm of what > > Quicksilver can do and what I need it to do. Quicksilver isn't perfect > > and has some glaring things wrong with it, but I just realized that it > > does most things extremely well and I really can't use my Mac without > > it. > > > That said, I'd be interested in working on the development of > > Quicksilver. Which issues need to be fixed, and at what priority? > > Which branch should I checkout on Xcode? Where should I commit my > > changes? Anything I should know before checking out the soruce? I'd > > like to speak with Etienne about this, as he seems to be one of the > > most prolific contributors. > > > Good to see people haven't abandoned this piece of software > > completely! > > > On Aug 14, 5:11 pm, Howard Melman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Quicksilver never "fully" worked. The question is, do the features you > > > use work? I use a fair amount of Quicksilver and it's still working > > > for me. > > > > I'm waiting for Quick Search Box to support some kind of triggers and > > > an equivalent of a third pane and maybe proxy objects. With that it > > > could replace QS for me. Unfortunately, while triggers are the most > > > voted for feature request for QSB, the developers haven't commented on > > > it yet. > > > > Howard > > > > On Aug 14, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Jordan Kay wrote: > > > > > It seems to me that Quicksilver is all but dead. The source seems > > > > bloated and unmanageable at this point. As much as a diehard > > > > Quicksilver user I was for 3 years, it just doesn't fully work on > > > > Leopard. Wouldn't it be better to focus resources on the new Google > > > > Quick Search Box, with a team that already seems to be pretty > > > > productive and is putting out builds nightly, and work on it to be > > > > just as good as if not better than Quicksilver, rather than trying to > > > > salvage Quicksilver in its current state? Even its creator, Alcor, is > > > > working on QSB and probably doesn't even want anyone to focus on > > > > Quicksilver. Just want to know what you guys think, as the most > > > > devoted users of the application.
