Hi;
Here is a rant about iTunes:
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/229398-2/day_3_dude_wheres_my_itunes.html
You guys are doing great, but I think it would be better if you were to work
more in priority order. There are 200M devices, last I checked. I don't
think iTunes has ever
So: yeah, we know it's an important app. But it's hard.
Feel free to help out.
- Dan
Hi;
I am glad to hear you say that iTunes is an important app, but I don't
understand what you mean because it has never worked.
You don't need my help. You've got a big group making many good fixes. It is
The problem with building a reader is that it would be about the same size
as LibreOffice. OpenDocument is very different from PDF. For those who can't
install LO, they probably can't install the reader either.
You have to think about file formats when interacting with people, just like
you have
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Steve Edmonds
steve.edmo...@ptglobal.comwrote:
The better solution is to include the fonts required in the odt file
just for LO use (like MS, and 2 previously mentioned word processors).
That is another solution, but not necessarily a better solution. I think
In order to succeed, a mass movement must develop at the earliest
moment a compact corporate organization and a capacity to integrate
all comers.
—Eric Hoffer, American philosopher
This discussion is interesting but it reminds me of people
re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Or, perhaps a
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
The overlap between TDF ASF's goals for an office product (modulo
enabling 'mixed-source') is a pretty compelling proof of competition.
I disagree...
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 8:08 AM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
And TDF/LO is the real fork in this case. In your opinion it would have
been a
necessary fork, but it is the fork nonetheless. Any argument otherwise is
revisionist history.
LO was a fork, but that was the for many months ago.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 June 2011 06:55, Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes.
How does that work? Surely if they licensed their work Apache
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
You describe how all the committers and people on the steering
committee know these details. Well, of course. But what about all the
people at Apache who are trying to learn about the work you guys have
done here? Trying to
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
That is great news! Reading over the archives, I was surprised
how some people who wished to contribute to both LOo and OOo
were turned away (with a we don't want your kind here),
and so seeing how LOo would now be open
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
We got our answer (before the vote) because Florian explained it. Our
point is that other people visiting the site will not have Florian's
attention. This has nothing to do with Apache, except by way of
example and that
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
than your consequences.
Forking makes cooperation more expensive. Your intentions are less
important
Sounds like we'll have to agree to disagree.
From my side I would say it isn't that you guys don't have good
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Allen Pulsifer pulsi...@openoffice.orgwrote:
Forking makes cooperation more expensive.
Your intentions are less important than your consequences.
Hello Keith,
As long as you are hung up on forks, you might want to get your facts
right.
Sun created the
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes. LibreOffice can become an upstream of Apache with this change. That
way people not interested in setting up build servers, etc. can work here
while Apache setup the infrastructure. Given the state of the code
-1
My list of 44 reasons is here:
http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?p=2567
To boil it down to one: this plan as announced had several big flaws, and
they still exist.
Kind regards,
-Keith
P.S. I don't see many from LibreOffice voting against this proposal, so I
joined again to vote on their
Maybe the people from LibreOffice are not voting against because, even
though they believe there could have been better solutions, given the
current situation they prefer that OOo is approved as a podling: see
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss/5824 for
a more
I was against this experiment since my first mail but I've reading and
learning a number of important facts since.
So I thought I would summarize the no vote reasons so I can
disconnect and return to my own big tasks ;-) If you've made up your
mind, plz delete as I don't want to waste any more of
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Keith Curtis wrote:
I wish the Apache org was more useful to me than just providing my HTTP
server.
It is official: Keith is a troll.
We always have.
Do not feed.
Sorry for anything off
Hello all;
I spent some time reading these email archives to get a better
understanding of the issues. To me it seem obvious this effort should
join with the LibreOffice community.
Why open source advocates at IBM would stand up for the right of
software to be made proprietary in the future
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 12:04 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:30:17 AM:
Here is a section of my book that gives a case study on forks:
http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=558
Maybe I'll make another case study about you guys
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Your input on apache.org lists hasn't impressed anyone with
your general aptitude or social skill level. By all means,
if you insist on making more juvenile remarks we will be
delighted to serve them up to the public
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Look, for reasons that won't ever be aired publically, TDF
and Oracle failed to work out amicable terms. Instead they
worked out terms with us. We aren't all that picky about
new initiatives, that's why we have an
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
We only benefit if the code is contributed to us, as we only accept
voluntary contributions. Nobody is going to rifle thru LO's repository
looking for juicy bits to snarf, we don't work like that. What we're
hoping
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
It provides over 150 other projects, all of them are useless to you ?
Yes, almost all of them are Java, and I don't have Java installed on
my laptop or server.
http://projects.apache.org/indexes/language.html
Apache
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
You have recipient and donor roles reversed. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_donor#Red_blood_cell_compatibility
Search the archives for some of Sam Ruby's emails.
I learned this in 6th grade and still
What are you talking about? You can relicense to your hearts content. You
just can't contribute it back under some other license otherwise user's
couldn't use it and then relicense it. If you can't grasp that concept then
there really is no point to further discussion.
Joe Shafer wrote
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Keith Curtis wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
You have recipient and donor roles reversed. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_donor
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
There are terms about redistribution that must be respected. Please read the
license - http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html
This will help you properly research the topic as well:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
You cannot simply strip the Apache License off of the code. You must
respect its terms.
Your overall work could be GPL'd, but that one file that comes with an
ALv2 license must continue to have that license. Stripping the
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
Fully disagree. I encourage you to read the terms.
-Keith
- Sam Ruby
This is what the Wikipedia page on the Apache License says:
The Apache License, like most other permissive licenses, does not
require modified
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
This is what the Wikipedia page on the Apache License says:
The Apache License, like most other permissive licenses, does not
require modified versions of the software to be distributed using the
same license.
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:12 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
We are now 50 posts on this list into an individual who is not a
contributor to TDF/LO, and is here seeking publicity for his writing.
Let's remember please to not feed the trolls, and move on.
I was only kidding
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:34 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
In my book, I talk for pages about the importance of the ODF standard.
Did you know that OpenOffice is already behind LibreOffice when it
comes to ODF support? It has to do with footnote markers.
Which is apropos
He wrote this yesterday and it describes in different words why the
Apache license is not so pragmatic for LibreOffice.
The problem is, that very much of our work is inter-dependent, and we
want people to be able to work all over the code, cleaning, translating
and fixing it. It would
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:23 -0700, Marvin Humphrey
mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 02:40:31PM -0700, Keith Curtis wrote:
I recommend separating things out into using free software versus
writing free software.
They're intimately tied, aren't
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:03 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@apache.orgwrote:
This conversation seems to be moving sideways into nonsense. Open Source
and
LAMP have nothing to do with each other. There are a million ways to
consume
open source without touching a LAMP stack (some people even
Hi all;
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 7:14 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@apache.orgwrote:
On 3/22/2011 7:19 PM, Keith Curtis wrote:
I guess some might consider a solution like that no worse than any other
but I think
endorsing such a stack goes against a good policy. If you are going to
make
Hi all;
I sent this message to the LKML last week, but I thought people in
Apache might find it interesting as well.
-Keith
-
Science doesn’t always proceed at the speed of thought. It often
proceeds at sociological or even demographic speed. — John Tooby
Open Letter to the LKML;
Hi,
That sounds very useful to me, I would like to use such a library. I
have experimented with some C++ code to generate footprints, by
generating text file output, and there have been a couple of parts
where I wanted to integrate copper areas for grounding. I ended up
generate
:
Hey Keith,
I'll see what I can do. Do you hold the copyirght for the icons in that zip
file?
If so, can we use them for our test suite?
Gert
*From:* Keith Curtis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:08 AM
*To:* mono-winforms-list@lists.ximian.com
*Subject:* Re
Hi;
I'm helping someone port a Winforms app to Mono and getting a crash in
resgen2.
I'm using Mono 1.2.6 from Ubuntu 8.04.
Here is the problematic resx file and the stack trace
http://keithcu.com/resgencrash.zip
Thanks for any help and let me know if anyone needs more info! Generally,
things
Liferea 1.4.3b fixes this bug:
On 9/25/07, Lars Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Version 1.4.3b(Stable)
* Fixes a data loss problem that causes flagged
items to be dropped out of cache. Normally
flagged items are never to be dropped.
(reported by Keith Curtis)
Liferea 1.4.3b fixes this bug:
On 9/25/07, Lars Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Version 1.4.3b(Stable)
* Fixes a data loss problem that causes flagged
items to be dropped out of cache. Normally
flagged items are never to be dropped.
(reported by Keith Curtis)
Hi;
Sorry for spamming this list, but I've sent several e-mails to this alias
last week about my situation, and sent follow-up mails to Mark Hymers and
Joerg Jaspert, but they are not responding, and I still do not have a
resolution.
Is it possible to discuss my situation with someone who is
Hi Holger,
I've seen responses from them and I fail to see which part of your
request is
not resolved. Also, IMO your talk is not suited for DebianDay.
The question that is not resolved is whether I am invited to give a
presentation and can be put on the schedule like others who are
I might be mistaken, but I couldn't find any reference of you being
involved in Ubuntu and Debian development. So your point of view is an
outsider's point of view, and I'm not sure it's worth a talk in either
DebianDay or Debconf.
My goal is not to debate my presentation before I give it,
Hi;
In November, I submitted a proposal to make a presentation at Debconf 7. In
March, I was accepted. Two weeks ago, I re-confirmed, and purchased my plane
ticket and reserved a hotel room.
However, I recently went to the Pentabarf website and I see that my
presentation's status has since been
The current plan is to have a separate set of demonstrations and
tutorials with a number of public machines showing how to install
debian/etc. Such demonstrations don't really lend themselves well to a
large talk format. Again, see previous comments on scheduling.
Which is why your
Hi Gunnar,
After reading the answers so far, I also agree with Kevin's comment -
Keith, your conference does not look like the kind of work expected
for Debian Day.
I don't know the full answer to this question except that I thought it would
be nice for partners, etc. to get a description
know, but I'm not sure where to start at this point.
Keith
-Original Message-
From: Robert Crocombe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 4:59 PM
To: Keith Curtis; linux1394-devel; linux-kernel
Subject: isochronous receives?
Keith, et. al,
I am having problems
know, but I'm not sure where to start at this point.
Keith
-Original Message-
From: Robert Crocombe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 4:59 PM
To: Keith Curtis; linux1394-devel; linux-kernel
Subject: isochronous receives?
Keith, et. al,
I am having problems
101 - 151 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
