On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:25 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> Le 2010-11-05 à 21:21, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>> On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:13 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>>
>>> Man, after spending 2 days with enterprise Java people at the Alfresco
>>> DevCon (a DEVELOPER conference where a good chunk of the guys wear d
Le 2010-11-05 à 21:21, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:13 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>
>> Man, after spending 2 days with enterprise Java people at the Alfresco
>> DevCon (a DEVELOPER conference where a good chunk of the guys wear dress
>> shirt?
>
> Now that is just plain wrong.
On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:13 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> Man, after spending 2 days with enterprise Java people at the Alfresco DevCon
> (a DEVELOPER conference where a good chunk of the guys wear dress shirt?
Now that is just plain wrong.
> #fail), I'm loving the WO community even more! At least
Le 2010-11-05 à 18:49, Chuck Hill a écrit :
> You should change your name to David too. As David Robert, you would REALLY
> confuse people!
Yeah, but to difference himself from the other Davids, people would call Robert
again :-)
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:09 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>
>> So
Man, after spending 2 days with enterprise Java people at the Alfresco DevCon
(a DEVELOPER conference where a good chunk of the guys wear dress shirt?
#fail), I'm loving the WO community even more! At least we have humor around :-)
> Och aye laddie,
>
> Don't ya know that it is indeed perfect f
Och aye laddie,
Don't ya know that it is indeed perfect for ya since yer name is David. And
anybody named David is highly esteemed and respected in this community (except
for one whipper-snapper whose name is David Avendasora), but other than that,
all Davids thrive when using the WebObjects te
It's a Triple-D technology.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:48 PM, David David Davidson
wrote:
> Thank you. It is an honour to get mail from a programming language.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>> So be sure to attend DavidDaveDC in 2011!
>>
>> Le 2010-11-05 à 17:08, Chuck
Thank you "Karl". And all of my hats off to "Mike" and "Chuck".
I'm planning to use WebObjects to create websites for a Swiss Tobacco brand.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Karl wrote:
> Tell us what you are trying to do and we can probably give you some tips.
>
> WebObjects is the best server-
Thank you. It is an honour to get mail from a programming language.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> So be sure to attend DavidDaveDC in 2011!
>
> Le 2010-11-05 à 17:08, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>
>> WebObjects is slowly transitioning to being a Pure David Technology. We are
On 2010-11-06, at 12:09 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> So be sure to attend DavidDaveDC in 2011!
With new examples of DaveObjects using DavidLips.
>
> Le 2010-11-05 à 17:08, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>
>> WebObjects is slowly transitioning to being a Pure David Technology. We are
>> sure you will fe
I'm only giving ray a hard time to save him from himself :)
I actually do have some vague recollection of fixing an eodbc bug related to
composite pks that you set yourself getting nulled out. I seem to recall there
is some assumption in eof that expects composite pks that are also relationship
You should change your name to David too. As David Robert, you would REALLY
confuse people!
On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:09 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> So be sure to attend DavidDaveDC in 2011!
>
> Le 2010-11-05 à 17:08, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>
>> WebObjects is slowly transitioning to being a Pure Da
I suppose it is possible, but I would regard that as unlikely. Of course, I
would have said the same thing about them killing off their 1U server line
yesterday so...
On Nov 5, 2010, at 3:41 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
> Do you think there is any likelihood that Apple might announce a license
Do you think there is any likelihood that Apple might announce a license change
to OS X? i.e. you can install OS X Server as a VM on Amazon or some other
cloud.
On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:52 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:46 AM, Chu
On 06/11/2010, at 5:25 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>> I do not like relying on tools to do the right thing, so perhaps there
>> should be a validation warning when 'propagate primary keys' are not
>> properly set. Or my case, without 'propagate primary keys', should work. Hm.
>> Not sure.
> you're m
I would do it if there were a compelling feature or function I can use to
improve my operation.
Joel
--
Joel M. Benisch CPCU, President
973-992-6300 x303
PaperFree Corpo
So be sure to attend DavidDaveDC in 2011!
Le 2010-11-05 à 17:08, Chuck Hill a écrit :
> WebObjects is slowly transitioning to being a Pure David Technology. We are
> sure you will feel right at home.
>
> David (the developer formerly known as Chuck)
>
>
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 1:47 PM, David Da
WebObjects is slowly transitioning to being a Pure David Technology. We are
sure you will feel right at home.
David (the developer formerly known as Chuck)
On Nov 5, 2010, at 1:47 PM, David David Davidson wrote:
> I was told WebObjects is perfect for me. Can you tell me why?
>
> Yours truly
On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:52 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
>>
>>> What do you guys think (if anything) will happen to OSX Server?
>>>
>>> It seems to me that if there is no X-Serve there is much less purpo
Yes you have heard right. It is perfect for all Davids.
David
On 2010-11-05, at 1:47 PM, David David Davidson wrote:
> I was told WebObjects is perfect for me. Can you tell me why?
>
> Yours truly,
> David David Davidson
> ___
> Do not post admin requ
Wow. Talk about fud.
On Nov 5, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Karl wrote:
> I think that OS X server, as a product, is going away.
>
> Its probably just going to be an optional package to iOS ‘Lion’ sold for $79.
>
> Karl
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 4:39 PM, André Mitra wrote:
>
>> Yes, but will anyone with
Tell us what you are trying to do and we can probably give you some tips.
WebObjects is the best server-side set of frameworks going when supplemented by
some open source and a few amazing people (hats off to Mike Schrag, Chuck and a
few others).
But you need to be much clearer about what you a
I was told WebObjects is perfect for me. Can you tell me why?
Yours truly,
David David Davidson
___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update y
I think that OS X server, as a product, is going away.
Its probably just going to be an optional package to iOS ‘Lion’ sold for $79.
Karl
On 2010-11-05, at 4:39 PM, André Mitra wrote:
> Yes, but will anyone with a Mac Mini upgrade to Server Lion for $499?
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 4:09 PM, Pascal
Yes, but will anyone with a Mac Mini upgrade to Server Lion for $499?
On 2010-11-05, at 4:09 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> And indeed, it sells well. I went to buy a Mac Mini Server a month ago
> at a local reseller and they said they sell at least 10 of them, and
> that's just a small reseller in s
Le 2010-11-05 à 15:51, Tim Worman a écrit :
> I have two diverging viewpoints. Being in higher education, we've got a lot
> of Apple gear. We have a server room with a rack full of XServes. I've seen
> real technology needs languish in OS X Server - to the point where we've
> already considere
On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
>
>> What do you guys think (if anything) will happen to OSX Server?
>>
>> It seems to me that if there is no X-Serve there is much less purpose for OS
>> X Server edition.
>
> That is probabl
I have two diverging viewpoints. Being in higher education, we've got a lot of
Apple gear. We have a server room with a rack full of XServes. I've seen real
technology needs languish in OS X Server - to the point where we've already
considered other options.
On the other hand, Apple has made it
On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
> What do you guys think (if anything) will happen to OSX Server?
>
> It seems to me that if there is no X-Serve there is much less purpose for OS
> X Server edition.
That is probably next week's announcement.
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:34 AM,
What do you guys think (if anything) will happen to OSX Server?
It seems to me that if there is no X-Serve there is much less purpose for OS X
Server edition.
On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:34 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
> Inevitable due to
> 1) the ubiquity of inexpensive Linux solutions (hardwa
> I do not like relying on tools to do the right thing, so perhaps there should
> be a validation warning when 'propagate primary keys' are not properly set.
> Or my case, without 'propagate primary keys', should work. Hm. Not sure.
you're making your life difficult ... just use the tools and let
On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:26 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
> the relationship wizard in entity modeler should set both of these variations
> up for you automatically if you pick "To Many" on both sides and turn on and
> off the "flatten relationship" checkbox ...
>
> ms
>
Hm. I will check that out.
>
the relationship wizard in entity modeler should set both of these variations
up for you automatically if you pick "To Many" on both sides and turn on and
off the "flatten relationship" checkbox ...
ms
On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
> Are the relationships to the join entity ma
On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:06 AM, Kasper Frederiksen wrote:
> Hi Chuck,
>
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kaspar,
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Kasper Frederiksen wrote:
>>
>>> I have a referential integrity problem in my model and I am at a loss as to
>>> how to
Are the relationships to the join entity marked as propagates primary key?
\
On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
>
> I keep trying to do this. It never works. I cannot see why, but I bump into
> it every once in a while and then I go ahead and do what I think is the
> not-so-smart thin
David Aspinall works with me now, he just does not post much.
Chuck, and doing his part to make WO a Pure David technology
On Nov 5, 2010, at 9:04 AM, Ken Anderson wrote:
> More David's please!!
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:09 AM, David LeBer wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:02 AM, David Aven
I keep trying to do this. It never works. I cannot see why, but I bump into it
every once in a while and then I go ahead and do what I think is the
not-so-smart thing and that works, so
Can anyone explain how this might be made to work? Or explain why it cannot?
Either I have a blind spot
More David's please!!
On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:09 AM, David LeBer wrote:
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 8:02 AM, David Avendasora wrote:
>
>> You have to _develop_ on Apple-branded computers, NOT deploy. You can deploy
>> on _anything_.
>>
>> Dave
>
> As soon as David Holt chimes in we can consider this
Yes, hopefully they will release a shorter Pro that will fit sideways in a
cage...
On 2010-11-05, at 8:01 AM, r...@synapticstorm.com wrote:
> The Mac pro is too bulky
___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev ma
Hi Chuck,
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
> Hi Kaspar,
>
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Kasper Frederiksen wrote:
>
> > I have a referential integrity problem in my model and I am at a loss as to
> > how to debug this.
> >
> > To illustrate the problem in it's simplest form, I
I suspect they do have a cloud strategy. Killing the XServe seems like a
natural step for Apple if my suspicions are correct.
http://www.macgasm.net/2010/10/25/apples-data-center-ready-kick-jams/
(^_^)
On Nov 5, 2010, at 6:36 AM, Karl wrote:
> Apple has no Cloud strategy. I think that sums i
On 2010-11-05, at 8:02 AM, David Avendasora wrote:
> You have to _develop_ on Apple-branded computers, NOT deploy. You can deploy
> on _anything_.
>
> Dave
As soon as David Holt chimes in we can consider this topic closed.
;-)
>
> On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:01 AM, r...@synapticstorm.com wrote:
>
On 2010-11-05, at 8:01 AM, r...@synapticstorm.com wrote:
> I thought the WebObjects license says you have to be running on Apple
> Hardware?
NO.
The license says you have to DEVELOP on Apple hardware.
Deploy anyway you like.
>
> I couldn't use a Mac pro or Mac mini in a data centre. The Ma
You have to _develop_ on Apple-branded computers, NOT deploy. You can deploy on
_anything_.
Dave
On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:01 AM, r...@synapticstorm.com wrote:
> I thought the WebObjects license says you have to be running on Apple
> Hardware?
>
> I couldn't use a Mac pro or Mac mini in a data cen
I thought the WebObjects license says you have to be running on Apple Hardware?
I couldn't use a Mac pro or Mac mini in a data centre. The Mac pro is too bulky
and
the Mac Mini can't take PCI cards so you can't connect it to fibre RAID systems
and neither system has redundant PSUs etc.
How am I
> 1) the ubiquity of inexpensive Linux solutions (hardware and/or VPS in
> the cloud)
plus whilst the xserve is 1u form factor, it's completely useless in
the data centre due to it being a power hog... before we saw the linux
light we had at one point 5 xserves which were drawing more powe
Le 2010-11-05 à 06:36, Karl a écrit :
> Apple has no Cloud strategy. I think that sums it up pretty much.
>
> So the NC DC is ‘virtualized’ but nothing Mac is there.
Unless they use Parallels Server...
> Karl
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 6:34 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
>
>> Inevitable due to
>>
Apple has no Cloud strategy. I think that sums it up pretty much.
So the NC DC is ‘virtualized’ but nothing Mac is there.
Karl
On 2010-11-05, at 6:34 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
> Inevitable due to
> 1) the ubiquity of inexpensive Linux solutions (hardware and/or VPS in
> the cloud)
>
Le 2010-11-05 à 06:29, Karl a écrit :
> That was inevitable since everything in the NC DC is non-Xserve.
It's all Mac Pro or all Solaris?
> On 2010-11-05, at 6:27 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>
>> http://www.apple.com/xserve/resources.html
>>
>> "Xserve will no longer be available after January 3
Inevitable due to
1) the ubiquity of inexpensive Linux solutions (hardware and/or VPS in
the cloud)
2) the fact that all the Mac heads learned unix in the last 8 years
3) small cash-strapped workgroups are using Mac Minis
That's my 2 cents ... let the opinion commenta
That was inevitable since everything in the NC DC is non-Xserve.
On 2010-11-05, at 6:27 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
> http://www.apple.com/xserve/resources.html
>
> "Xserve will no longer be available after January 31, but we’ll continue to
> fully support it."
>
> Apple will not be developing a
http://www.apple.com/xserve/resources.html
"Xserve will no longer be available after January 31, but we’ll continue to
fully support it."
Apple will not be developing a future version of Xserve
• Orders for Xserve will be accepted through January 31, 2011
• Apple will honor all Xserve warranties
52 matches
Mail list logo
