I agree - Leo is probably way more than 100% feature-complete. It's also been a tremendous comfort to me and my solo programming efforts over the years.
However, Leo is still imprisoned in the standalone-software-installed-on-desktop paradigm, and thus stuck in a rapidly-disappearing era. The biggest problems I've had with Leo to date have been: - Gaps in backward incompatibility - serious corruption and data loss issues when editing years-old Leo files, something which has tripped me up many times - Incompatibility with team environments - inability for more than one developer to work on files at once I can't use Leo on my tablet or smartphone, unless I screenshare in to a desktop running it. Unless the tablet is on a LAN near the desktop, and has a 10" screen, this is unworkable. *I would suggest that Leo's future lies in a complete rebuild, cloud from the ground up. Firstly, a decent API into a cloud-based Leo engine. Secondly, decent GUI clients on Web (Ember.JS? Pyjamas? AngularJS?) and Android/iOS.* The cloud-based paradigm, for me, would do away with the concept of a leo "document". Instead, it would focus on a 'view', which may contain one or more nodes. Nodes would exist outside of views, and be able to reference other nodes recursively. The APIs could then be supported by widgets in the main client-side toolkits, to allow web apps to embed Leo editing widgets with ease. Files are where it gets tricky. Non-Leo-users absolutely detest the Leo sentinels. But updating a node tree to reflect changes in a file outside Leo is a programming task beyond merely painful. However, if Leo i smade to be as team-friendly as Google Docs (where you can even see teammates' cursors in different colours moving around the document), there will be virtually no need to edit files from outside the Leo environment. Again - desktop is dying. Leo *has* to go cloud! Cheers David On 30 July 2015 at 01:07, Edward K. Ream <edream...@gmail.com> wrote: > In my mind, all essential aspects of Leo are complete. Sure, there will > always be improvements to be made, and I intend to keep making them, but > now that that we have @clean the most important work is complete. > > Imo, Leo is good enough as it is. What's not so good is outreach to the > rest of the world. Marketing, if you will. > > An excellent suggestion is to reach out to magazine editors, get them > excited, and have them write or commission articles about Leo. I think > this is a great idea, but we haven't made much progress on this front. > > Recently I've been thinking about creating "true" Leo modes for emacs and > vim. This would be a lot of work. In essence, this would create Emacs and > Vim guis. All other code must remain the same, and the gui must (mostly) > be written in Python, not elisp or vim script. > > Your comments, please. > > Edward > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "leo-editor" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
