csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/01/2002 (19:15) :
>
> The second part applies. I remember reading that computer users should
> take hourly breaks. Walk away from your box and stare into a gray wall.
> I should know. I used to do DTP where I'd be staring at the screen far
> too long figuring if
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:18:46 +0100
Preben Randhol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/01/2002 (11:13) :
> >
> > Oh c'mon. There's a reason for the fish. If you see the fish, it simply
> > means that "You're spending too much time with your computer. Prolonged
> > expo
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 12:14:35PM +0100, Tony Crawford wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (on 30 Jan 2002 at 13:44):
>
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:01:27AM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: >
> > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly: > >
> > ... gnome code bloat ... > > Like the man sa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (on 30 Jan 2002 at 13:44):
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:01:27AM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote: >
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly: > >
> ... gnome code bloat ... > > Like the man said, you have the
> source, go and fix it.
>
> Or not use it :)
How abou
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/01/2002 (11:14) :
> Preben Randhol writes:
> > Which means that free software cannot be trusted and will not be of
> > industry quality.
>
> After all, nobody in "industry" would put a flight simulator in a
> spreadsheet, would they?
I see. The free sof
csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/01/2002 (11:13) :
>
> Oh c'mon. There's a reason for the fish. If you see the fish, it simply
> means that "You're spending too much time with your computer. Prolonged
> exposure to this GNU/Linux box has been known to cause hallucinations,
> acute insominia, ca
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:20:14AM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I could go on all day with examples, but I'll end my rant here. Wanda
> > freaked me out, made me perform unneccessary, worrying work, and apon
>
> Hey, it's just an innocent fish...
I du
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 06:26:55PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Preben Randhol writes:
> > Which means that free software cannot be trusted and will not be of
> > industry quality.
>
> After all, nobody in "industry" would put a flight simulator in a
> spreadsheet, would they?
>
> I don't like "ea
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:01:27AM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
> ... gnome code bloat ...
>
> Like the man said, you have the source, go and fix it.
Or not use it :)
Crispin
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 10:50:28PM +1100, Martin Strauss wrote:
>
> I do believe that the swimming fish comes courtesy of the wanda panel-applet,
> which (unlike bash) is surely not a tool for serious work. If you don't want
> this sort of humour, remove the fish from your applet.
I dont remembe
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I could go on all day with examples, but I'll end my rant here. Wanda
> freaked me out, made me perform unneccessary, worrying work, and apon
Hey, it's just an innocent fish...
> finding its an Easter Egg, has made me quite angry. Ever wonder why
>
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Martin Strauss wrote:
> I do believe that the swimming fish comes courtesy of the wanda
> panel-applet, which (unlike bash) is surely not a tool for serious work.
> If you don't want this sort of humour, remove the fish from your applet.
When the first time it happened to me
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Ron Johnson wrote:
> If you are _really_ so exercised about bloat, there's nothing
It's an applet. It's not bloatful, I guess. Don't you think so...?
Oki
Preben Randhol writes:
> Which means that free software cannot be trusted and will not be of
> industry quality.
After all, nobody in "industry" would put a flight simulator in a
spreadsheet, would they?
I don't like "easter eggs" either, but I do not labor under the delusion
that "commercial" so
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:27:58 +0100
Preben Randhol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (11:26) :
> > If you are _really_ so exercised about bloat, there's nothing
> > stopping you from sending a patch along with the bug-report. I
> > bet it gets implem
At 01:07 AM 1/30/02 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
>John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (23:20) :
>>
>> My point is it can be whatever the people willing to do the hard work want
>> it to be
>
>Which means that free software cannot be trusted and will not be of
>industry quality.
John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (23:20) :
>
> My point is it can be whatever the people willing to do the hard work want
> it to be
Which means that free software cannot be trusted and will not be of
industry quality.
> WARNING -
> This email is confidential and may cont
At 10:29 AM 1/29/02 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
>John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (01:16) :
>> In any volunteer endevaour the people who do the work decide how they shall
>> manage their time.
>>
>> if putting the fish in gave someone a sense of fulfilment and kept them in
>
* Preben Randhol ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> Dimitri Maziuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (18:31) :
>
> > Like the man said, you have the source, go and fix it.
>
> Yes and how fragmented wouldn't things be if one should fork off every
> project out there. Anyway it is hopeless
Dimitri Maziuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (18:31) :
> Like the man said, you have the source, go and fix it.
Yes and how fragmented wouldn't things be if one should fork off every
project out there. Anyway it is hopeless because it means one have to do
the changes every time there is
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:01:27 -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
>* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
>... gnome code bloat ...
>
>Like the man said, you have the source, go and fix it.
Having a chest full of tools and a Chiltons does not imply that I am
able or willing to do a ring
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
... gnome code bloat ...
Like the man said, you have the source, go and fix it.
Dima (see headers for relevant tag)
--
Surely there is a polite way to say FOAD.-- Shmuel Metz
"Go forth and multiply".
Martin Strauss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (12:53) :
> I do believe that the swimming fish comes courtesy of the wanda panel-applet,
> which (unlike bash) is surely not a tool for serious work. If you don't want
> this sort of humour, remove the fish from your applet.
# apt-get remove
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (11:26) :
> If you are _really_ so exercised about bloat, there's nothing
> stopping you from sending a patch along with the bug-report. I
> bet it gets implemented faster that way.
Hopefully the bugreport reaches the upstream maintainers.
> O
Begin [EMAIL PROTECTED] quotation:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 12:38:09PM +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
> > Suddenly wanda from the fish applet (but without the background) swam
> > accross my Gnome desktop today. I use sawfish as WM. Do anybody know if
> > there is a program that has implemented th
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 12:38:09PM +0100, Preben Randhol wrote:
> Suddenly wanda from the fish applet (but without the background) swam
> accross my Gnome desktop today. I use sawfish as WM. Do anybody know if
> there is a program that has implemented this as a "fun" things? It isn't
> so fun when
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:43:05 +0100 Preben Randhol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (01:24) :
> > >And that fish is relevant to "free" vs "closed" software exactly how?
> > >
> > >Dima (boggle)
> >
> > Because the developers were free to put it in
John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (01:24) :
> >And that fish is relevant to "free" vs "closed" software exactly how?
> >
> >Dima (boggle)
>
> Because the developers were free to put it in
>
> and you are free to take it out if you care enough
>
> you're not free to decide th
John Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (01:16) :
> In any volunteer endevaour the people who do the work decide how they shall
> manage their time.
>
> if putting the fish in gave someone a sense of fulfilment and kept them in
> the project then good for them.
>
> the free world w
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:39:51 -0600 Dimitri Maziuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * John Griffiths ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> > >And that fish is relevant to "free" vs "closed" software exactly how?
> >
> > Because the developers were free to put it in
> >
> > and you are free to take it ou
Dima writes:
> Oh, I see. "Free" as in "free to put useless bloat in".
You've got the source: release a de-bloated version.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
* John Griffiths ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> >And that fish is relevant to "free" vs "closed" software exactly how?
>
> Because the developers were free to put it in
>
> and you are free to take it out if you care enough
>
> you're not free to decide the developers priorities for them
>
begin John Griffiths quotation:
> In any volunteer endevaour the people who do the work decide how they shall
> manage their time.
>
> if putting the fish in gave someone a sense of fulfilment and kept them in
> the project then good for them.
>
> the free world will always be different from t
>And that fish is relevant to "free" vs "closed" software exactly how?
>
>Dima (boggle)
Because the developers were free to put it in
and you are free to take it out if you care enough
you're not free to decide the developers priorities for them
only for yourself.
* John Griffiths ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> >I'm using some of my spare time developing software that is free in the
> >GPL sense, but I rather use the time finding that last bug, than
> >introduce more by putting useless easter eggs into my code. But then I
> >think that rain is wet, so w
>I'm using some of my spare time developing software that is free in the
>GPL sense, but I rather use the time finding that last bug, than
>introduce more by putting useless easter eggs into my code. But then I
>think that rain is wet, so who am I to judge.[1]
>
>[1] Hitch Hiker's Guide to The Gala
Stig Brautaset <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 29/01/2002 (00:54) :
>
> If you don't like it, don't use it. Some people[1] are using a lot of
> their (spare?) time to give the community a free desktop environment; I
> say they are entitled to have a bit of fun.
But this is beside the point. The poi
* Preben Randhol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake thus:
> Brian Stults <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/01/2002 (17:33) :
>> You might want to try www.google.com/linux. Entering the following
>> string produced some informative results:
>>
>> +"easter egg" +wanda
>>
>> This isn't a flame, just hopefully
"Jean-Marc V. Liotier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 12:38, Preben Randhol wrote:
> > Have anybody else experienced this?
>
> Happened to me a couple of week ago late at night, and I really thought
> I was hallucinating.
Me too. Really unpleasant. First thought was "I've be
* Britton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
> Since everyone is bashing this easter egg I'll speak up in its defense: I
> think its cute and harmless and possibly helpful...
You must be using an unusual definition of "helpful".
A Real Life story (which I already mentioned here):
someone posts
Since everyone is bashing this easter egg I'll speak up in its defense: I
think its cute and harmless and possibly helpful, like the jester in
Diaspar in Arthur C. Clarke's 'City and the Stars' who injected a little
controlled unpredictability into the ancient self contained city to
prevent the po
Brian Stults <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/01/2002 (17:33) :
> You might want to try www.google.com/linux. Entering the following
> string produced some informative results:
>
> +"easter egg" +wanda
>
> This isn't a flame, just hopefully a useful tip.
Yes but if you are not sure what it is yo
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 07:16, Preben Randhol wrote:
> Chris Jenks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/01/2002 (12:59) :
> >
> > There was a thread about this, roughly two weeks ago or so. It an easter
> > egg.
>
> Phew. I didn't see that thread. Sh*t I thought somebody was messing with
> my computer.
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 12:38, Preben Randhol wrote:
> Have anybody else experienced this?
Happened to me a couple of week ago late at night, and I really thought
I was hallucinating.
I only appreciate easter eggs if they remain rare, subtile and discreet.
Wanda was a pleasant suprise, but wherever
Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/01/2002 (12:59) :
> This is a rare Easter Egg in the GNOME panel.
Ok.
> There is one more if you want to hunt for it...
Not a huge fan of easter eggs, I consider it bloat.
Preben
--
Preben Randhol --- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/ --
Chris Jenks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/01/2002 (12:59) :
>
> There was a thread about this, roughly two weeks ago or so. It an easter
> egg.
Phew. I didn't see that thread. Sh*t I thought somebody was messing with
my computer. I searched the net for easter egg and wanda, but didn't
find any
At 06:38 AM 1/28/02, Preben Randhol wrote:
Suddenly wanda from the fish applet (but without the background) swam
accross my Gnome desktop today. I use sawfish as WM. Do anybody know if
there is a program that has implemented this as a "fun" things? It isn't
so fun when you don't know what is doin
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 11:38, Preben Randhol wrote:
> Suddenly wanda from the fish applet (but without the background) swam
> accross my Gnome desktop today. I use sawfish as WM. Do anybody know if
> there is a program that has implemented this as a "fun" things? It isn't
> so fun when you don't kno
Suddenly wanda from the fish applet (but without the background) swam
accross my Gnome desktop today. I use sawfish as WM. Do anybody know if
there is a program that has implemented this as a "fun" things? It isn't
so fun when you don't know what is doing it.
Have anybody else experienced this?
P
49 matches
Mail list logo
