I see Leo as a platform, I think the 'Next Big Thing" can be that what is built with Leo.
You wrote about computational power, I think more about the increasing complexity that power is bringing. We need tools to manage, monitor and explain an increasingly rich (complex and daunting) information environment. I picture a Leo file with documentation, a smart node which will open a set of files on the filesystem, safely, without impinging on them. Buttons and commands are tailored to the application, protocol, or service this particular Leo file has been prepared for. This file does ONE thing amazingly well. Another Leo file next to it is built to do one other thing amazingly well. They each have different buttons, menus, commands, @nosent nodes. Leo is used to create file-based toolchains / tutorials. The ONE Leo file does exactly what it's author wants it to do and the Leo file mirrors his understanding of a topic, collapsing much of the complexity of configuration, dependencies, maintenance. I can see this file becoming as standard component of any package or distrubution, alongside configure and make. Sort of a super-shell with hierarchal data/file/executable/documentation content capability. It will mirror the experience of the author, offering shortcuts, hints, explanations without anything extraneous. I'm currently studying LDAP, SNMP, LVM, Samba, Zope's Buildout, and others, I try to assemble the components which allow me to create documentation and scripts as I go, both for my own later use, and for the potential of helping another along the learning curve. Required is: 1 brilliant hierarchy management 2 brilliant Python integration 3 brilliant non-intrusive path and file capability 4 dead simple, cascading configuration 1 and 2 stand alone in available tools, 3 frustrates me, 4 seems like it won't happen. The problem is, without all 4, I end up fighting with Leo instead of creating with it, and I return to working to combine scripts in a more traditional way, but without surprises or dead ends. My $.02 Thanks, Kent I periodically attempt to use Leo as described, and put On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Edward K. Ream <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's something of a joke at my house when I say that Leo is almost > finished. I've been saying that for a long time. > > Nevertheless, Leo is, if fact, nearing completion. Indeed, Leo's to- > do list has been steadily decreasing for over a year. Here is my > present general schedule: > > QQQ > May 5 > - 1-2 weeks: vim bindings. > Took 11 days, including new drawing code. > > May 16 > - 1 week: leo-as-a-package. > - 1 week: bugs. > - 1 week: flexible file format. > - 2 weeks: integrate rope (& autocompleter) > - 2 weeks: gtk gui. > > Updated total: 7 weeks. > QQQ > > Note in particular that the "vim" (new-key) bindings was finished on > schedule even though the new drawing scheme became a part of it. > > Sure, the 2-week projects could take longer, but it does look like > everything will be finished this year. And nothing else has a great > deal of appeal. Yes, I'll continue to support Leo--probably for the > rest of my life, but I don't see the support role taking more than a > few hours a week. > > Furthermore, many others can contribute to Leo now... > > What this means is that I shall soon be looking for the "next big > thing". This is healthy and normal. I know from experience that this > can be a stressful time--the old routines are not sufficient to occupy > my days. But that can't be helped. > > Edward > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
