Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - AngelinaBelle
2
Archived fixes / Database error -- search for members
« on June 13th, 2013, 04:35 PM »
"Search for Members" links to http://wedge.org/do/mlist/?sa=search
This results in an error --Quote
This results in an error --
Database Error
Please try again. If you come back to this error screen, report the error to an administrator.
3
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on January 30th, 2013, 09:06 PM »
That is an interesting observation, Arantor.
The "why" of that has been covered pretty thouroughly, I think, from many different perspectives.
The "why" of that has been covered pretty thouroughly, I think, from many different perspectives.
4
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on January 30th, 2013, 06:56 PM »
Whatever everyone thinks they said, or thinks they understood someone else to say, or meant to say, or got misunderstood to say, the recent rift between SMF or Simple Machines and several SMF devs has happened.
On some issues, I have agreed with what the bulk of the devs seemed to be saying. On some issues, I have agreed with some statements that the bulk of the devs did not seem to agree with.
Going forward, I am not sure I would choose to re-hash some of the arguments I made, and try to explain what I REALLY meant. would just like to say "If that's how I came off, then I apologize."
I personally feel that it will be great if the SMF project and the Elkarte devs build a good relationship. I think SMF and Elkarte have a lot to offer each other, and I keep expecting that, one day, everyone will start to understand one another, and have an easier time working more closely together. Just call me Pollyanna.
On some issues, I have agreed with what the bulk of the devs seemed to be saying. On some issues, I have agreed with some statements that the bulk of the devs did not seem to agree with.
Going forward, I am not sure I would choose to re-hash some of the arguments I made, and try to explain what I REALLY meant. would just like to say "If that's how I came off, then I apologize."
I personally feel that it will be great if the SMF project and the Elkarte devs build a good relationship. I think SMF and Elkarte have a lot to offer each other, and I keep expecting that, one day, everyone will start to understand one another, and have an easier time working more closely together. Just call me Pollyanna.
5
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on January 10th, 2013, 09:32 PM »
Arantor,
I agree with you that the SMF project is not in tip-top shape at the moment. We have 2 devs at the moment, and will be in better shape with more devs. "Too many decision-makers" is an interesting comment. That's the team. Everyone on the team is a decision maker. Everyone gets a vote.
Nao -- I am sorry I cannot post links to discussions made on the SMF team boards. They were made with every expectation of remaining "team only" in perpetuity, and won't be moved to "public" boards. I don't think I will be breaking anybody's expectations of privacy by assuring you that I saw no evidence that the team was concerned about Wedge "killing" SMF. I think anyone who has read the public boards here from about that time already knows that some SMF team members were not happy with the Wedge team at the time, and that they were under the impression that Wedge team members were not happy with them.
My statements about strong feelings coloring decisions is simply my own impression of the mood of the time -- certainly, it is plausible that emotion can affect decision-making, even when individuals strive for objectivity.
I agree with you that the SMF project is not in tip-top shape at the moment. We have 2 devs at the moment, and will be in better shape with more devs. "Too many decision-makers" is an interesting comment. That's the team. Everyone on the team is a decision maker. Everyone gets a vote.
Nao -- I am sorry I cannot post links to discussions made on the SMF team boards. They were made with every expectation of remaining "team only" in perpetuity, and won't be moved to "public" boards. I don't think I will be breaking anybody's expectations of privacy by assuring you that I saw no evidence that the team was concerned about Wedge "killing" SMF. I think anyone who has read the public boards here from about that time already knows that some SMF team members were not happy with the Wedge team at the time, and that they were under the impression that Wedge team members were not happy with them.
My statements about strong feelings coloring decisions is simply my own impression of the mood of the time -- certainly, it is plausible that emotion can affect decision-making, even when individuals strive for objectivity.
6
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on January 10th, 2013, 07:40 PM »
And a Happy New Year to you!
The discussion about the Forks discussion board really was about the open source issue.
Of course, EVERYONE's most well-reasoned opinions may have been colored by their feelings toward the people involved.
As in -- "We went through a lot of trouble to switch to an open-source license, and we should promote open source", with a dash of "I'm a bit angry at those Wedge fellows at the moment, but I don't think that really influences my opinion on the license issue".
It is lovely to see people turn over a positive new leaf isn't it? A lovely way to start the new year!
The discussion about the Forks discussion board really was about the open source issue.
Of course, EVERYONE's most well-reasoned opinions may have been colored by their feelings toward the people involved.
As in -- "We went through a lot of trouble to switch to an open-source license, and we should promote open source", with a dash of "I'm a bit angry at those Wedge fellows at the moment, but I don't think that really influences my opinion on the license issue".
It is lovely to see people turn over a positive new leaf isn't it? A lovely way to start the new year!
7
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on January 3rd, 2013, 06:36 PM »
I've been away for a bit.
I take many of your points, Pete.
The compromise, of course, on "rules for the forks board" was among the at-the-time team members.
Team members are decision makers on that board.
The SMF team is different from, say, and Apache team. On an Apache project, only the committers are the decision-makers -- that's a small number of devs. And basically, they only make decisions about what goes into the official version of the code. "Official" discussions don't seem to use forum software, and there aren't a lot of options for making rules about what people can discuss where.
The SMF team is different from an Apache project team, and probably from a lot of other FLOSS project teams.
The SMF team has a long history. It still contains people with a diversity of opinions on how the project should run itself.
Some team members have responded to these discussions by leaving the team (others, of course, have left for family, job, educational, and other reasons)
The team is not perfect.
I appreciate your interest in boosting the sustainability of the SMF project. That is a noble goal.
It has been my understanding that, with Wedge, you and Nao were, in part, motivated by the idea of demonstrating the benefits of certain approaches you WISHED the SMF team had been taking up to that point.
On top of that, by simply being the first to fork the BSD-licensed SMF 2.0 code, you helped the entire SMF community (including the SMF team) get their heads around what it means to have more community participation in SMF code development.
I take many of your points, Pete.
The compromise, of course, on "rules for the forks board" was among the at-the-time team members.
Team members are decision makers on that board.
The SMF team is different from, say, and Apache team. On an Apache project, only the committers are the decision-makers -- that's a small number of devs. And basically, they only make decisions about what goes into the official version of the code. "Official" discussions don't seem to use forum software, and there aren't a lot of options for making rules about what people can discuss where.
The SMF team is different from an Apache project team, and probably from a lot of other FLOSS project teams.
The SMF team has a long history. It still contains people with a diversity of opinions on how the project should run itself.
Some team members have responded to these discussions by leaving the team (others, of course, have left for family, job, educational, and other reasons)
The team is not perfect.
I appreciate your interest in boosting the sustainability of the SMF project. That is a noble goal.
It has been my understanding that, with Wedge, you and Nao were, in part, motivated by the idea of demonstrating the benefits of certain approaches you WISHED the SMF team had been taking up to that point.
On top of that, by simply being the first to fork the BSD-licensed SMF 2.0 code, you helped the entire SMF community (including the SMF team) get their heads around what it means to have more community participation in SMF code development.
8
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on December 5th, 2012, 04:44 PM »
"rules are rules" is hardly a cop-out. If we stick to the rules, we don't have to discuss them endlessly, and can (hopefully) move on to other things. It does seem to be in Motoku's nature to point out and explain rules. Holding major Wedge discussions in chit-chat rather than in the Forks board seems like a compromise that is more-or-less satisfactory to everyone with a say in the rules on simplemachines.org.
The eventual success of the SMF software, community, or project is not on your shoulders. If you quietly retired from the SMF community, it would not kill the SMF project. If you made a controversial public statement, and then retired, you could incite arguments and temporary disruption, but your actions would not kill the SMF project.
Arantor and Nao, you started the Wedge project for several different reasons. What were your goals then? What are they now? Which of these goals are worth pursuing in the future? Does the Wedge project bring progress towards these goals? Does it do it at an acceptable cost? People enter and leave FLOSS projects and communities all the time for various reasons. If the product is compelling enough, there is always someone arriving interested in picking up where someone else has left off. An enduring project will have to accomodate and encourage this succession.
You may feel that the SMF project would sometimes serve itself better by making different choices than it has made.
I sometimes agree with you, and sometimes disagree with you. I appreciate it when you test and show the results of your testing. I generally have no argument with either one of you. I believe this to be true of many other members of the SMF project, even some members who have argued with one or the other of you in the past.
Don't stay in it out of vague "quitter's guilt" alone. Stay in it because you are working toward noble goals. And plan to replace yourself. You are unlikely to stay in it forever, no matter how noble the goals.
The eventual success of the SMF software, community, or project is not on your shoulders. If you quietly retired from the SMF community, it would not kill the SMF project. If you made a controversial public statement, and then retired, you could incite arguments and temporary disruption, but your actions would not kill the SMF project.
Arantor and Nao, you started the Wedge project for several different reasons. What were your goals then? What are they now? Which of these goals are worth pursuing in the future? Does the Wedge project bring progress towards these goals? Does it do it at an acceptable cost? People enter and leave FLOSS projects and communities all the time for various reasons. If the product is compelling enough, there is always someone arriving interested in picking up where someone else has left off. An enduring project will have to accomodate and encourage this succession.
You may feel that the SMF project would sometimes serve itself better by making different choices than it has made.
I sometimes agree with you, and sometimes disagree with you. I appreciate it when you test and show the results of your testing. I generally have no argument with either one of you. I believe this to be true of many other members of the SMF project, even some members who have argued with one or the other of you in the past.
Don't stay in it out of vague "quitter's guilt" alone. Stay in it because you are working toward noble goals. And plan to replace yourself. You are unlikely to stay in it forever, no matter how noble the goals.
9
Other software / Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« on November 28th, 2012, 08:12 PM »
Well, you know how it is. It can be difficult to get an entire organization to agree on everything.
On the one hand, people want to discuss all forks, and what the entire SMF-and-its-forks community can learn from them.
On the other hand, since SMF went open-source, the organization wants to promote and encourage open source projects.
The rules on the forks board were a compromise. Certainly influenced by how the members of Simple Machines was feeling at the time.
It seems to me that Motoko was simply trying to spell things out, and make clear that nobody would be penalized for talking about talking about wedge.
The rules might seem silly, viewed from here, but the rules are the rules. Organizations make them, and then follow them in order to get on with the business of the day.
As you can see in some of the earlier topics I started myself on that board, it is not completely prohibited to mention wedge, in the context of what the SMF community can learn from wedge. It is a fine line, though, and the SMF team decided it did not want to allow a non-open-source fork to promote itself on that board. I hope you can understand.
On the one hand, people want to discuss all forks, and what the entire SMF-and-its-forks community can learn from them.
On the other hand, since SMF went open-source, the organization wants to promote and encourage open source projects.
The rules on the forks board were a compromise. Certainly influenced by how the members of Simple Machines was feeling at the time.
It seems to me that Motoko was simply trying to spell things out, and make clear that nobody would be penalized for talking about talking about wedge.
The rules might seem silly, viewed from here, but the rules are the rules. Organizations make them, and then follow them in order to get on with the business of the day.
As you can see in some of the earlier topics I started myself on that board, it is not completely prohibited to mention wedge, in the context of what the SMF community can learn from wedge. It is a fine line, though, and the SMF team decided it did not want to allow a non-open-source fork to promote itself on that board. I hope you can understand.
10
Off-topic / Re: The 10 Year Sigh
« on June 12th, 2012, 07:51 PM »I can get out there pretty much any day in the next week or so, what's up with that?!
People rarely make an offer unless they want to, for one reason or another.
Clearly, you've got a friend who cares about you.
Clear your mind. Evaluate your priorities in life.
11
Off-topic / Re: The 10 Year Sigh
« on June 11th, 2012, 10:36 PM »
The fact that you are sharing this with a bunch of people who only know you "on paper" makes me think you are feeling lost and confused right now. I don't mistake myself for one of your dear, close friends, but I do respect the parts of you I've met online.
I can't make any very specific comments because I honestly don't know you very well.
"Forest for the trees" is a problem not only in developing code, but in many parts of life.
I think the best advice I've seen here is to go see the people who really care about you, in person. Or invite them over.
See their faces, shake hands, hug.
The second best advice is about doing things that are good for you, healthy for you, and help you feel good about yourself.
Diet, exercise, trip to the doctor -- all those kinds of things.
Of course, you are going to feel blue, "in mourning" or even depressed for a while. Accept that, and accept that you are going to be able to move on.
A common thing to do about now is to think through your priorities. What is important in this life?
In the future, what balance will you look for in the different parts of your life?
Many people feel most satisfied when they feel connected to something good, important, and larger than themselves.
Thinking through these things will help you as you work through the feelings and try to figure out which way is up.
Adversity and opportunity. I don't know what your best path forward is, but I wish you all the best.
I can't make any very specific comments because I honestly don't know you very well.
"Forest for the trees" is a problem not only in developing code, but in many parts of life.
I think the best advice I've seen here is to go see the people who really care about you, in person. Or invite them over.
See their faces, shake hands, hug.
The second best advice is about doing things that are good for you, healthy for you, and help you feel good about yourself.
Diet, exercise, trip to the doctor -- all those kinds of things.
Of course, you are going to feel blue, "in mourning" or even depressed for a while. Accept that, and accept that you are going to be able to move on.
A common thing to do about now is to think through your priorities. What is important in this life?
In the future, what balance will you look for in the different parts of your life?
Many people feel most satisfied when they feel connected to something good, important, and larger than themselves.
Thinking through these things will help you as you work through the feelings and try to figure out which way is up.
Adversity and opportunity. I don't know what your best path forward is, but I wish you all the best.
12
Features / Re: Privacy options
« on December 6th, 2011, 09:34 PM »
It will be complicated.
And scary, because you need to allow "everyone" to use stuff that was meant for only admin.
Easy enough to make the user moderator of the user's membergroups. New to make them able to create usergroups.
New and confusing to give them a simple new UI, then putting that output into creating an actual permission profile.
And new to let them apply a permission profile to a topic, a thing that doesn't have permission profiles in SMF.
And new to force Wedge to honor per-topic permission profiles.
When do you feature-lock this puppy?
And scary, because you need to allow "everyone" to use stuff that was meant for only admin.
Easy enough to make the user moderator of the user's membergroups. New to make them able to create usergroups.
New and confusing to give them a simple new UI, then putting that output into creating an actual permission profile.
And new to let them apply a permission profile to a topic, a thing that doesn't have permission profiles in SMF.
And new to force Wedge to honor per-topic permission profiles.
When do you feature-lock this puppy?
13
Features / Re: Privacy options
« on December 6th, 2011, 04:51 PM »
It seems to me that what is wanted is the ability for the user to
* create user-controlled custom groups, to which the user can add whomever they want
* An option to automagically maintain a user-controlled custom group of "buddies"
* create user-controlled custom profiles, in which the user can specify whichever permission they want for each group (general or custom)
* create the ability to apply custom profiles to topics, rather than to boards. topics without profiles would use the board's profiles. Permission on any topic would be the most restrictive of the combination of board and topic permission. This will be tricky, combining all those A's, D's, and X's properly for people who are in multiple groups, where they might have A, D, and X permission on the same pouvoir.
SMF 2.0's interface for groups would work OK, but you would only want the current permissions profile interface available as "advanced permission setting" option. You'd want a dead simple interfact that allows them to choose only "groups which can see this post", or whichever set of options you want to present, but then passes that information to a method that then either creates a proper permission profile, or else re-uses one of the standard permission profiles (which must be provided, and you cannot allow ADMIN to delete them, or else the whole thing breaks).
* create user-controlled custom groups, to which the user can add whomever they want
* An option to automagically maintain a user-controlled custom group of "buddies"
* create user-controlled custom profiles, in which the user can specify whichever permission they want for each group (general or custom)
* create the ability to apply custom profiles to topics, rather than to boards. topics without profiles would use the board's profiles. Permission on any topic would be the most restrictive of the combination of board and topic permission. This will be tricky, combining all those A's, D's, and X's properly for people who are in multiple groups, where they might have A, D, and X permission on the same pouvoir.
SMF 2.0's interface for groups would work OK, but you would only want the current permissions profile interface available as "advanced permission setting" option. You'd want a dead simple interfact that allows them to choose only "groups which can see this post", or whichever set of options you want to present, but then passes that information to a method that then either creates a proper permission profile, or else re-uses one of the standard permission profiles (which must be provided, and you cannot allow ADMIN to delete them, or else the whole thing breaks).
15
FAQs / [FAQ] Re: What is Wedge?
« on December 1st, 2011, 05:03 PM »
Starting starting over from scratch with parse_bbc might be in order.
The current design requirements for a replacement would be a bit different from the original design requirements. Times have changed.
Not only "better formatting" but also ways to use a limited bbcode set in an embedded AJAX thingy (chat or other thingy) without affecting the bbcode set available for rendering the main content of the page. etc.
Not to mention -- optimization. [Unknown] said he had to reject regexp in parse_bbc, because he realized that, though it would normally be faster, there could be some "weird posts" that would take ridiculously long to parse using a regexp-based parser.
The current design requirements for a replacement would be a bit different from the original design requirements. Times have changed.
Not only "better formatting" but also ways to use a limited bbcode set in an embedded AJAX thingy (chat or other thingy) without affecting the bbcode set available for rendering the main content of the page. etc.
Not to mention -- optimization. [Unknown] said he had to reject regexp in parse_bbc, because he realized that, though it would normally be faster, there could be some "weird posts" that would take ridiculously long to parse using a regexp-based parser.