I'll just focus on the line, "All that being said, I think that
offline registration is a very good idea." (I'm one of the ones who
is waiting for the bug reports to calm down before I think seriously
about purchasing Versions. We have gotten along just fine with
Subclipse in Eclipse for some time now. I guess I'm too dense - or
too busy - to figure out why I should not be using Subclipse or why I
should augment it with Versions. )
- Bob
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Quinn Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bob -
>
> I think we can all accept that some computers are never allowed to be
> connected to the internet, and can understand the problem and frustration
> you're feeling by not being able to register on such machines. Don't assume
> that anyone was judging your *character* by commenting about your reply —
> after all, email is a very difficult medium for inferring intent. However,
> you should be aware that the parts which made it sound "snarky" (which I
> agree with) are not just in the mind of one person:
>
> — "There are things called intranets" can easily be taken as an insult to
> the intelligence of the authors. Assume they're well aware of intranets,
> what they're used for, etc. In addition, one's definition of intranets being
> "connected to the internet" or not can be hazy — in my company, our intranet
> is behind a firewall, but anyone inside can connect to the internet at
> large.
>
> — "So wake up guys!" seems like an overt criticism, and doesn't seem to
> consider the fact that the devs are prioritizing as best they know how and
> balancing a lot of issues. It's great that Macs are being used in this type
> of protected environment, but I would venture to guess it's a non-issue for
> most users.
>
> All that being said, I think that offline registration is a very good idea.
> The vast majority of users will be honest about using their license only as
> intended, and one could entirely do away with a registration server at all.
> (Remember, we're talking about Mac users here, and OS X doesn't even have a
> license code — you could technically install 10.6 on any Mac that supports
> it, yet people still buy family packs.) I imagine that people could
> conceivably use Subversion completely offline altogether, by using file://
> repository URLs. I think all users could benefit from a more trusting, less
> centralized registration system. And judging by the frequency with which
> registration complaints crop up on this list, it would make life easier for
> our friends at Picodev/Sofa, too. ;-)
>
> - Quinn
>
> On Sep 28, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Bob Futrelle wrote:
>
>>
>> Sorry, but not every company is willing to go to that effort. Many
>> government and military installations have strict rules about such
>> things, and are loathe to make exceptions.
>>
>> My comment was in no way intended to be "snarky". I was just pointing
>> out the great strictures that organizations place on connectivity,
>> given the serious breaches of security that occur on a daily basis.
>>
>> Any notion that my comment was "snarky" or "mean" are in your mind.
>> Certainly not in my mind or, I'm sure, in the minds of many other
>> people. There is nothing mean-spirited in my character -- my
>> acquaintances and colleagues would attest to that.
>>
>> Nuff said.
>>
>> - Bob
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Andrew Gehring
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, but this comes across as a rather "snarky" comment. This isn't the
>>> first application in the world that requires a remote connection to
>>> "activate"...
>>> Constructive criticism is one thing, that comment comes across a just
>>> plain
>>> mean.
>>> Perhaps an organization that would like to use a really nice tool, such
>>> as
>>> Versions, could "temporarily" provide connectivity to said system(s), so
>>> that an application could be "activated".
>>> - Andrew
>>> Note: I work for a organization that has isolated networks, that are not
>>> allowed to communication "outside". Systems are built-out with the
>>> necessary
>>> tools, scanned, then placed on the network. I am using Versions on one
>>> said
>>> network, without issue...
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Bob Futrelle <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are things called intranets that are big in big companies. They
>>>> don't want them connected to the internet. A lot of code sharing can
>>>> go on inside companies using intranets only. But it looks as if they
>>>> won't (can't) be using Versions.
>>>>
>>>> So wake up guys!
>>>>
>>>> - Bob
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Versions" 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/versions?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
