> For Firefox, that means (for example) that we can use upstreams
> Awesome Bar instead of reimplementing our own url completion. For
> abiword, it means acknowledging that a lot of our initial Tubes port
> was/is simply unnecessary now that we have a stream-based
> collaboration mechanism, and we
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:11 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, I agree that this is a goal that makes a lot of sense.
>> Unfortunately, my experience says that the approach you are suggesting
>> won't
On 17 Jul 2008, at 20:37, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> $0.01: we shouldn't feel like shipping unsugarized apps is a failure:
> better an working app w/ crappy UI than no working app at all!
Sorry to disagree Scott. I'm not so sure... One 'crappy' UI or weak
security riddled activity, leads to a do
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I agree that this is a goal that makes a lot of sense.
> Unfortunately, my experience says that the approach you are suggesting
> won't be less work than what we are doing right now, because the
> software components yo
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:37 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lots of reasonable points made on this thread.
>
> The two cents I'd like to throw in are:
> $0.01: we shouldn't feel like shipping unsugarized apps is a failure:
> better an working app w/ crappy UI than no working app
Edward Cherlin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
The abi devs
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> The abi devs have also asked for help in testing Write with non-l
Lots of reasonable points made on this thread.
The two cents I'd like to throw in are:
$0.01: we shouldn't feel like shipping unsugarized apps is a failure:
better an working app w/ crappy UI than no working app at all!
$0.02: my suggestion to "replace" Browse wasn't to eliminate the
sugar-speci
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The abi devs have also asked for help in testing Write with non-latin
>> scripts, this is something of high importance for OLPC.
>
> I can do th
Edward Cherlin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> The abi devs have also asked for help in testing Write with non-latin
>> scripts, this is something of high importance for OLPC.
>>
>
> I can do that. OK, Cyrillic works. I just entered e
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The abi devs have also asked for help in testing Write with non-latin
> scripts, this is something of high importance for OLPC.
I can do that. OK, Cyrillic works. I just entered every key on the
layout, upper and lower cas
It might be a good longer-term focus to see if we could get some of
the Bitfrost ideas pushed upstream rather than diluting them. It has
applicability well beyond OLPC and Sugar.
-walter
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Erik Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These are suggestions with a longt
These are suggestions with a longterm focus.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 01:02:04PM -0400, Erik Garrison wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > If we cannot bring all the abiword potential to Sugar's Write, we risk
> > someone will start asking for running unsugariz
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Erik Garrison wrote:
> | On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> | Given the quantity of free software available for Linux distributions
>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Erik Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> If we cannot bring all the abiword potential to Sugar's Write, we risk
>> someone will start asking for running unsugarized OpenOffice or
>> Abiword on the XO
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erik Garrison wrote:
| On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
| Given the quantity of free software available for Linux distributions
| relative to the quantity of available sugarized applications, I believe
| that repeats of thi
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> If we cannot bring all the abiword potential to Sugar's Write, we risk
> someone will start asking for running unsugarized OpenOffice or
> Abiword on the XO, just as happened with Browse :/
Given the quantity of free software availabl
18 matches
Mail list logo
