On May 12, 2012 5:39 PM, "Peter Bittner" <[email protected]> wrote: > > PCA, that's not meant to be a personal offence. Still, I feel your > statement needs correction: > > 2012/5/12 pca <[email protected]>: > > Leading edge is very interesting. "Bloody bleeding edge" is not really > > synonymous with stable releases, AFAIK. > > The quote on http://pyjs.org says, GWT = bleeding edge. So, is GWT unstable? > Relax! You can still go back to COBOL and Fortran, ADA may also be an > option. Or write a Java applet. I've heard that ABAP is also fun > programming. > > Seriously, if you have a better quote why not present it here, or add > it to (your forked copy of) pyjs.github.com directly?
pyjs.org repo :-) The .github.com one was a stopgap until a better method was found ... that report is moving to `pyjs-org` user account (the user that actually owns the `pyjs` org); this puts the report out of sight and mind. > I don't mean to criticise your crititcs. We need to be responsible > though in tearing down what was built in the past. If we want to be a > good community we should do better than the average: figure out what > was the goal of the original creator and try to match or merge them > with yours! > Such a -- e.g. quote -- may have the potential to be better than yours > _and_ the old alone. That's fair enough Peter -- this and your other statements -- we can hold for a bit here; there is much else to be done. Although, I am not particularly fond of that specific quote myself ... I feel its necessary to uphold as professional an image as possible, even if it means less "spice" and tastes a bit bland. IMO, nothing beats crisp, pure, simple and to-the-point information ... people come to discover, learn, and seek the next steps ... most else is background noise. Perhaps it would be good to produce/discuss some ideas for the future site? Functional requirements, visual layout, color schemes, experimental ideas ... the works. -- C Anthony
