From: Hubert Figuiere (hfiguiere@teaser.fr)
Date: Tue Sep 23 2003 - 03:48:20 EDT
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 02:17, r coyne wrote:
> [If this belongs on the developer list, someone please
> forward; I've never gotten acquainted with that one.]
This does belong to the developer list.
> Now that Abiword 2 is out, more or less (and people
> are even speaking of 2.2), it's time to put in my two
> cents worth on planning for Abi 3.
We accept US checks, French checks, Australian checks, USD, AUD, EUR and
GBP bills mostly. You can also pay with PayPal or Kagi. The more you
send us, the more we'll listen.
[...]
> Reading the posts
> here, I am continually struck (and appalled, and
> scared off) by how fragile abi is. One seems to need
> exactly the right versions of everything, or they
> won't work together and may cause very serious
> problems. What with various projects and developers
> and packagers and download sites all over the world
> working rather independently and asynchronously, this
> degree of coordination is not to be expected. And
> even if it were possible, purely from the user's point
> of view it is very inconvenient and offputting to have
> to upgrade everything at once rather than
> incrementally at leisure and maybe selectively. And
> what gets me is that I don't see why it has to be this
> way.
please provide and alternative. patches are welcome.
> Take plug-ins, for example -- a never-ending source of
> problems. I don't understand how plugins work, but
> surely it should be possible to vector them through
> some sort of table of pointers or jump addresses or
> instructions in such a way that any given
> function(ality) is guaranteed to be findable in the
> same place even as the actual code gets rewritten and
> moved around and new abilities added in future
> versions.
You don't know how they do works, but pretend to provide us a better
solution. Who are you ? God ?
> I realize that abi is designed to run on a multitude
> of platforms and that this complicates matters. But
> don't all operating systems nowadays provide pretty
> much the same basics, like a directory tree,
> environmental variables, pipes, and so on? And if you
> stick with a programming language compiler/package
> that is widely available, won't it do a lot of the
> work of coordination, adapting to each OS it runs on?
> So if you take a lowest-common-denominator approach
> and if you spend enough time and effort early on, like
> now, working out the conventions for how the various
> routines, modules, files, programs, plugins, packages,
> etc. are supposed to find and communicate with each
> other, I would think you could come up with something
> less demanding and more robust than the present
> arrangements.
Why don't you install OpenOffice ? It does what you describe.
[...]
> But then, I haven't programmed in years and am far
> from au courant, so I'm just talking through my hat
> and may be totally wrong.
Yes, you are wrong. I'm not used to say that, because I usually do
listen, but here MY ego is being struck by a lot of arrogance from
someone who did not even contribute a penny to a project we spend lot of
time on. And you even pretend to know the truth, know what is best.
Take a break, stop feeding trolls, fork your own version of AbiWord and
show what you can do.
If you felt I was rude, then you are right. Your e-mail pissed me off.
Hub
-- "<erno> hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is." -- http://www.bash.org/?5273----------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to abiword-user-request@abisource.com with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 23 2003 - 04:03:07 EDT