On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 19:08 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> The idea of a single global setting for date entry is not a bad one.
> Feel free to submit a feature request.
OK, done: 1700856
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by D
On Sat, 2007-04-14 at 13:56 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Actually I would say that is up to Chris M. If he choses to make it a
> public issue, because he feels others are possibly going to be effected
> the same way, then that is up to him.
>
> Further if he wishes to keep it a private matter
The idea of a single global setting for date entry is not a bad one.
Feel free to submit a feature request.
On 4/14/07, David Tangye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:11 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > In short:
> >
> > Programmers will want the templates on disk. This makes
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:11 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> In short:
>
> Programmers will want the templates on disk. This makes sense.
> Non Programmers don't even know what a text editor is.
> Our target audience is Non Programmers.
That's why I liked the idea of having the value for the data-
I woul d just add that this effort *has* had a positive public impact.
Dieter has reverted back to the GPL though fairly unhappily. My own
opinion has always been that his license is up to him, but that users
ought to know what is going on and other copyright holders should be
involved. After al
>> Joshua D. Drake
>
> Let me be clear:
>
> I agree that people should be notified of the license change. I never
> said differently but I can see how my statement could be taken as such.
> What I disagree with is the implication that Chris M.'s situation be
> the vehicle for sharing that
Hi,
I've been lurking for a while watching LSMB develop, very pleased with
what I see.
There were posts about a need for a forum but no one stepped up.
I think a forum will be a big usability step forward for many
users/potential users.
I also think a forum will allow some advantages with section
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Christopher Murtagh wrote:
>> On Saturday 14 April 2007, Charley Tiggs wrote:
>>> No, you shouldn't. Part of why I joined this community was that the
>>> core team of LSMB had higher standards of behavior than the core team of
>>> SQL-Ledger.
>
> We absolutely have higher
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Ashley J Gittins wrote:
> Hi All,
> As you may (or may not) be aware, with the release of SQL-Ledger 2.8.0
> DWS
> has changed the license from the GPL to a new, bespoke license which
> appears aimed at preventing others from re-using his code.
>
> http://www.purple.drop
On 4/14/07, Christopher Murtagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, I contacted some of the SL users who had been asking
> questions about 2.8.0 directly, to let them know of the license change. Many
> of them were quite surprised that this had happened and thanked me for
> letting them know.
I h
Again, sorry for the cross-post.
As Ashley Gittins has mentioned, another attempt to get the license change
mentioned somewhere has been submitted to slashdot. If you do have a moment
and a slashdot account, please vote it up:
http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=133637
Multiple attem
Christopher Murtagh wrote:
> On Saturday 14 April 2007, Charley Tiggs wrote:
>> No, you shouldn't. Part of why I joined this community was that the
>> core team of LSMB had higher standards of behavior than the core team of
>> SQL-Ledger.
We absolutely have higher standards and we are not turning
On Saturday 14 April 2007, Charley Tiggs wrote:
> No, you shouldn't. Part of why I joined this community was that the
> core team of LSMB had higher standards of behavior than the core team of
> SQL-Ledger.
It wouldn't matter anyway, Dieter is heavily censoring the SQL-Ledger mailing
list. Sinc
Hi All,
As you may (or may not) be aware, with the release of SQL-Ledger 2.8.0
DWS
has changed the license from the GPL to a new, bespoke license which appears
aimed at preventing others from re-using his code.
While I and most others do not have an issue with that specifically, the
pr
No, you shouldn't. Part of why I joined this community was that the
core team of LSMB had higher standards of behavior than the core team of
SQL-Ledger.
Charley
Ed W wrote:
>> One of our core developers, Chris Murtagh, had his support account
>> (for SQL-Ledger) cancelled by DWS Systems Inc, p
> One of our core developers, Chris Murtagh, had his support account
> (for SQL-Ledger) cancelled by DWS Systems Inc, presumably due to his
> involvement in our project.
...outrageous...
You should CC this to the SQL-L list...
Ed W
---
16 matches
Mail list logo
