Re: Need for launchpad
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 11:25:28AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> On Sunday 08 January 2006 09:49, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > > On Sunday 08 January 2006 07:27, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> > > > > Ubuntu's launchpad is amazing. Do you think it would be helpful if
> > > > > all DD's worked through it on their projects? Wouldn't that keep
> > > > > things more organized and efficient? Or perhaps Debian could build
> > > > > its own version of launchpad which is better. Again, I think it
> > > > > would do a good job keeping everything organized an efficient.
> > > >
> > > > The day when working on Debian requires the use of a web interface
> > > > will be the day that I hunt down and painfully kill the person
> > > > responsible for doing it.
> > >
> > > Luckily that the bts of Launchpad has a mailinterface..which is quite
> > > nice. So some other parts will have mailinterfaces as well, and some
> > > other goodies where someone can attach some nice cli tools.
> >
> > Which nobody except the Blessed Few (being those who have signed the NDA
> > allowing them access to the Launchpad code) can modify or enhance.
>
> Everything what is on https://wiki.launchpad.canonical.com/ is free to use.
VS2005 Express is free to use, too. What's your point?
> Read and think again. Or use another example: Amazons code is not free to
> see, but you can use the interfaces described in their developers documents,
> same applies to google api.
> So where is the difference? Everybody is playing with public interfaces,
> where the sourcecode is non-free. But nobody complains. Without google
> e.g., as a free, but sourcecode-non-free service, most of the people here,
> even the cli guys are lost.
I don't build my entire development infrastructure around Google.
> Oh, I never signed an NDA, so I've never seen the code, actually I'm not
> interested in the code, because if I have a problem with the result, I can
> file bugs against this products, or bug the maintainers of the code in their
> present irc channel :)
And, in my experience, unless your needs happen to coincide with what the
Launchpad want to do, you'll be ignored. Which is fine -- scratching one's
own itch and all -- but not exactly productive for Debian's needs. Or, for
that matter, Ubuntu's own MOTU team. I've noticed several things that the
MOTUs have stated a desire for that isn't in Launchpad.
> > > > Removing the ability to manage things from the shell would not be more
> > > > organised and efficient unless you're a complete fricking moron who
> > > > can't operate a unix host. Which appears to be the target audience of
> > > > launchpad.
> > >
> > > Well, I'm happy to see, that a lot of people are not thinking like you.
> > > They see launchpad as a collaborative worktool.
> >
> > Your comment doesn't follow from what Andrew said.
>
> Well, if I see that e.g. find and xargs are more efficient for my local file
> search then the beagle desktop search or whatever, it's my choice.
Again, you're not addressing what Andrew said.
> But regarding, that vi, emacs or kbabel are not network aware for sharing the
> workload with the community, I think rosetta as translation webapplication
> is, in this moment, the best tool to work with. The output of Rosetta is
> usable for everyone and anyone. So, now, what is more efficient?
Hmm, 10 minutes with Emacs (including committing to the public repo) against
probably spending that long just waiting for pages to reload in Rosetta.
You might get this massive productivity boost if, in fact, you have a bunch
of people all working on a set of translations *simultaneously*, but let's
be honest here, how often does that *actually* happen?
> Well, if I see the difference between 20 people working on one application and
> translating them in less then 2 hours, or I'm sitting in a dark, cold cellar,
> alone, only with vi, and translating 30 strings in 2 hours, what is more
> worth for OSS or free software?
Driving away people who know they are more productive on the command line,
so that everyone can group-hug on the web? Priceless.
> > > But why should I tell that to a unix-guru, who can't even read the code
> > > of conduct of the mailinglist of the distribution he is working for.
> >
> > People in glass houses, and all that. Last time I got a serve from someone
> > on an Ubuntu channel, I raised the issue of the Code of Conduct and got
> > told "so what?".
>
> I don't know if this guy who said that, ever signed the code of conduct, well
He did. I checked.
> > > Finally, are you not able to use lynx?
> >
> > I know your smarter than that. Pressing the down-arrow 50 times to reach
> > an action button takes a lot longer than typing a quick command to invoke
> > that same action, and we both know it. Please don't throw bogus solutions
> > around like that, it only encourages him.
>
> Hehe...well, it's a matter of working behaviour. I never said, that working
> from the CLI is not faster or more productive sometimes.
Right.
> What I'm trying to say is, that this "arrogant elite thinking" must go
> away. We have to focus on what we all want, that is bring good software to
> the world. For that, we have to find a simple and usable solution, that
> everyone can work with. Not only the so called elite, or actually those
> people who think they are.
So you think that removing the most productive interface for the most
productive people, and replacing their intelligent contributions with the
output from many more people who can't type properly is somehow superior?
Catering for the masses is fine, but only if it doesn't drive away the
"elite few" who typically actually spend the hard yards doing the work.
> > > But give them a choice, because linux/unix is choice.
> >
> > *cough*NDA*cough*.
>
> To use a tool, I don't need a NDA.
But to modify Launchpad in ways that suit you (ie, exercise your choice) you
have to sign an NDA. What sort of choice is "my way or the highway"?
That's a pretty limiting choice.
- Matt
Reply to: