No subject

Tue Jun 4 12:17:20 MDT 2013

user doesn't see, that go far beyond the end appearance or functionality
that the user will see.

D. Stimits, stimits at

> to what you REALLY need to concentrate on, the UI, and any 'special
> functionality' you're looking for.
> >   dont know about other developers, but I use snippets of others code in my
> > apps. But mostly look to their code, to learn from, that way, I dont have
> > to include their copyrighted code, and include their copyright, in my
> > project. Its all for the glory, man.
> So you'd rather take the ego boost from not giving someone else credit for
> completely functional code?  That's a rather selfish attitude to take in a
> culture reputed (in the outside world, at least) for being more of a 'gift
> sharing oriented' group.  If you're looking to have your ego stroked, I
> suggest politics -- there's always room in that profession.
> The advantage many people see in the Open Source community (and the view that
> ESR puts forth a lot, as I interpret it) is that many pairs of
> [(eyes)|(hands)|(minds)] working on code, and having that code available to
> be SHARED, instead of reinventing what doesn't need to be, is a good thing.
> Items like KDE vs. Gnome, Linux vs. *BSD, etc. because of MAJOR philosophical
> differences are understandable, are a good thing, and I believe promote
> healthy competition in the Open Source community.  However, the view I see
> coming from you is two-fold:  "I don't want to reuse his code because I don't
> want to have to give him credit for it" shines forth, as well as "Since I
> don't like the way he indents his code, I don't want to use it."  If the
> indenting bothers you *THAT* much, reformat the damn thing!  It won't take
> *THAT* long, unless you're rewriting the damned kernel...  And there *ARE*
> tools to deal with this!
> > Still, people have different views of how the program should look, and act,
> > and how the code should be layed out. You want to look at a patched
> > together mess, look at the code for kdevelop. Ughh, great program, but I
> > would HATE to hack on it.
> I haven't looked at the source for Kdevelop, but I will to get an idea of
> what you're getting at.  However, if I'm reading this right, you're
> complaining about how the code is written a lot, as well as how it looks and
> acts -- which is what I'm addressing!  If you don't like the way the code is
> layed out, take the source, reformat it, and rebuild it!  You might have a
> better way, you don't really know.  Same with the UI and look/feel aspects!
> YOU DON'T HAVE TO RECODE IT ALL FROM SCRATCH!  You've got the source to the
> app right there!  It'll take you a lot less time to take the code and rebuild
> it than to write it all up from scratch...  And who knows, maybe people will
> thank you for fixing some of their problems!
> I'm sorry if I'm ranting too hard, and I'm not directing a personal attack at
> you.  However, it appears to me that you're making this extremely hard when
> it doesn't have to be -- there's plenty of OSS apps out there that have lots
> of good code in them.  You don't have to write all new code for your new
> mailreader PIMP (Pimp Is More than Pine) when you can take the editor
> functions from Pico, the POP and IMAP code from Mutt, and toss it all
> together?  Yes, you'll have to give credits to other projects, if not
> specific people...  But they'll have saved you a lot of time NOT reinventing
> the wheel, and you can work on getting whatever feature (oh joy, it prints my
> mail out in BINARY) that you want.
> --mec
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:
> Mailing List:

More information about the LUG mailing list