Hi,
El 31/08/11 11:56, Matt Wilkie escribió:
Welcome back Edward :) I hope you feel as refreshed from your
vacation as I do from my stay-cation.
I join to the welcome back messages Edward. Nice to have you here and in
good shape :-)
[...]
From my perspective, I desire Leo's ability to manage trees and have
clones and execute scripts in truly rich text and graphical
environment. I wish I could paste images and markup text in Leo with
the same ease that I use MS Word or Onenote. At present most of my
work is trifurcated. One set of activities takes place in Leo and
other plain text tools, a second in Word/Onenote, and the last in
computer mapping and graphic design. I find myself constantly
repeating things in one of these environments that I've already done
(part of) in another.
That would be my ideal Leo environment too. Recently I was
explaining/showing Leo to a pair of friends. The idea of clones is a
really powerful and quick to catch one. If they have a more familiar
interface oriented towards non-technical users surely both would start
to use it (in fact one of them, the more technical guy is going to use
it and the non-technical girl still is not).
Maybe someday there will be a grand unification leo-like environment,
stranger things have happened. I suspect that like the grand
unification theory quest of physics, it will be illusive, perpetually
just out of reach, and smell like it's around the corner. ;-)
I wish .leo fi)les could just *be* programs, but most people would find
such a scheme unacceptable.
The FOSSIL source code management tool has done some impressive things
in this regard:
http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
For me the idea of a file based approach a la "everything is a file" of
Unix is becoming more and more insufficient. The more I approach
Smalltalk and its "everything is a object" philosophy, the more I see
this insufficiency. Flat files or metafiles about them (a la Leo) don't
deal properly with some kind of abstraction about storage, version
control and so on, so you need to put a lot of intelligence outside the
files, usually in small programs "that made one thing, made it right and
communicate". The thing is that this are not small portable programs any
more. For example, you have always to install the SCM/VCS for your
plattform and deal with the extra stuff, like visualization or web
enabled interaction (think about the web interface of gitorious or
bitbucket). I think that the interaction of Fossil + Leo could solve the
idea of having external files in a single "Leo document" that would be
really a fossil sqlite repository with all the external files in it, but
syncronizable with the outside world. This kind of instantiated image of
files in a moment of time in Fossil + Leo, would be like the
instantiated image of objects in a moment of time of Smalltalk. I don't
know for sure for anyone else, but I think that the more Leo users use
Leo, the more they would like to "live inside" Leo (that is my case,
anyway) and I believe that this would be possible, only if Leo
incorporates a default, minimalist a portable discourse about storage
and version control. Fossil is for me, that kind of discourse to talk with.
Cheers,
Offray
--
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.
