"Jonathan Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A reasonably reliable headhunter I've dealt with in the past is
> looking for technical project managers for new web company. Let me
> know if interested...
Hmm... I wonder if I could morph... Bet that's a permie thing isn't it?
--
Piers Cawle
Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, jo walsh wrote:
>
> > gah, i feel old and sleepy
>
> As does anyone who got home at 4am ;-)
>
> > so nothing changes, but it was nice to realise that in the company
> > of perlmongers.
>
> Yey. Thanks dave it was much fun, and I on
Dominic Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 08:46:39AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> > Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I presume that this is a permie thing?
> >
> > Yes. And I'd estimate that _most_ of you I know would be, um, a bit
> > too "heav
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> * GUI
>
> I really don't want to have a server running a GUI, it adds at least some
> overhead, encourages people to `work on the server' and as its an additional
> process may add additional security concerns.
A
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 03:13:19PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> here is the results from a partial mbox of ny.pm messages, it is not
> that complete an mbox, but it does indicate that we are simply not
> doing or best to take over NY.pm
You know, I've been meaning to ask...
Why in the world
Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> Oh, and I think the thing about readdir returning the first
> entry of an array in scalar context is dumb. That isn't DWIM.
> Returning the number of entries in the directory would be
> about a million times more sensible (especially if it didn't
> count . and .. as ent
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 03:34:28PM +0100, Peter Haworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Can someone please remind me about the technical meeting on the 21st? Now
> that it looks like I might be in London at the time, I find I've deleted
> all the relevant messages and can't remember if there's an
Paul Makepeace wrote on Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2001 13:27:
> Greg McCarroll: 1546
**
> Dave Cross: 762
> Jonathan Stowe: 729 ***
>Robin Szemeti: 586 **
>
Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2001, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
>
> > > their Memory Stick is a closed book.
> >
> > Fine with me. Then maybe we'll get decent short range wireless data
> > exchange with good authentication and encryption.
>
> and the problem with Lucent
Robin Szemeti wrote:
[google]
> seems able to find the *right* thing .. many many times the thing
> I want is in the no1 spot
Yes. google++, definitely.
Its success is probably partly because it looks at how many links point to
the page. If lots of people link to site X, then site X is probably
Greg McCarroll wrote on Freitag, 8. Juni 2001 11:11
> And some pieces of software just wont be able to be plugged
> in - why can't i run Samba on Windows?
Why would you want to? AFAIK Samba implements the SMB protocol, which is the
native resource (file, printer, ...) sharing protocol of Wind
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A reasonably reliable headhunter I've dealt with in the past is looking for
> technical project managers for new web company. Let me know if
> interested...
"new web company" .. wow .. now theres a phrase you don;t here very often
these d
- Original Message -
From: "Neil Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> I would strongly suggest you check out the Palm M500/505 as they come in
the
> lovely Palm V form factor but have an expansion slot (taking both Secure
> Digital and Multimedia cards)
> http://www.palm.com/products/accessorie
Hi,
A reasonably reliable headhunter I've dealt with in the past is looking for
technical project managers for new web company. Let me know if
interested...
--
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can someone please remind me about the technical meeting on the 21st? Now that it
looks like I might be in London at the time, I find I've deleted all the relevant
messages and can't remember if there's an archive.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
... You're in a maze of twisty lit
here is the results from a partial mbox of ny.pm messages, it is not
that complete an mbox, but it does indicate that we are simply not
doing or best to take over NY.pm
does anyone have a larger set of NY.pm messages we could analyse?
David H. Adler: 137 *
* Struan Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said:
> > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> >
> > > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-)
> >
> > arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out ..
... and some not so pretty pictures.
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/london.pm/2001-06-07/
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/
Good advice is always certain to be ignored,
but that's no reason not to give it-- Agatha Christie
* at 08/06 11:54 +0100 Robin Szemeti said:
>
> pah! .. tis written in the scripture ... 'let he who hath one eye be
> blessed' .. clearly the 'one eye' is a reference to the one 'i' in vi ..
> its *obvious* innit ... I shall found my entire religion on this shadowy
> fact wriiten by our lord him
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Struan Donald wrote:
> * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said:
> > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> >
> > > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-)
> >
> > arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out ..
>
* at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-)
>
> arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out ..
> have you been using [x{0,1]]emacs again ... ?
and th
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-)
arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out ..
have you been using [x{0,1]]emacs again ... ?
--
Robin Szemeti
* Dean ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > There is entirely to much DLL upgrading for my liking at every possible
> > chance with Windows software/service pack. I don't believe that this can
> > really lead to a stable system.
>
> Win2k address a lot of these issues with its dll and system
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> Well here are some reasons why i prefer UNIX to Windows * for servers,
I'm going to play devils advocate. I've been using Win2k for the last four
months and have a basic grasp of it. Its difficult because i agree with a
lot of you
* at 08/06 10:11 +0100 Greg McCarroll said:
>
> Well here are some reasons why i prefer UNIX to Windows * for servers,
> they are pretty much personal reasons and i'm sure not everyone agrees with
> them.
I'd also add that is something hardwary does go wrong and the box
stops running, windows
* Jonathan Peterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> >
> >At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more
> >frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact.
>
> I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've
> never used it at th
>
>At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more
>frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact.
I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've
never used it at the server end. It may have all sorts of scalability
issues an
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, jo walsh wrote:
> gah, i feel old and sleepy
As does anyone who got home at 4am ;-)
> so nothing changes, but it was nice to realise that in the company of
> perlmongers.
Yey. Thanks dave it was much fun, and I only inaproperatly fell asleep
three times... Interesting ride
* Struan Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>
>
> this is almost as bad as those games that make a point of letting you
> know exactly how long you've played it.
>
yip, all that time and i still haven't ascended ;-)
--
Greg McCarrollhttp://217.34.97.146/~gem
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:26:44AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> This is dated from beginning of last year, and mutt is saying that's
> about 13,700 messages (gasp!). Note that some people
> (dcross) appear more than once. Not that a) they
> necessarily need it b) have any hope, ever, of catching
30 matches
Mail list logo
