> Hello Mayuresh,
>
> a possible reason can be that he is thinking "Some
> of it might stick".
Not likely.
Go back under your rock, along with RMS and the rest
of the bunch.
>
> --
> Michael Schmidt MIRRORS:
> Watcom
> ftp://ftp.fh-koblenz.de/pub/CompilerTools/Watcom/
> OpenO
groklaw is a joke. Best to ignore them. Were it not
for idiots at SCO the idiots at groklaw would've
remained the obscure fanbois they are.
Do you waste your time reading the effusions of fans
of Britney Spears? How about Paris Hilton fans and
their insightful blogs? Do you get your definition
> I'm just a lurker on the OpenBSD list, but I think
> Charles is right about
> Linux. The code is better then people give it credit
> for, and considering
> it's vast popularity and what all it's accomplished,
> the "bazaar" model has
> worked wonders.
Well, the hype certainly put the zap on your
that are BSD licensed? What are user experiences with
different ones?
Note, they must be either commercial or BSD licensed.
I'll write my own before I use a GPL'd product. :-).
Thanks,
Dereck
t software.
Dereck
--- Han Boetes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote:
> > You also received an e-mail from Norbert Bollow,
> right? :-)
>
> Indeed I did. And I want everybody to get involved
> and to start
> thinking about it!
>
> Th
te and I want it to grow at the expense of Linux
where possible. :-).
At the risk of sounding "mushy" I really think a
little more friendliness is in order. And BTW, I've
often noticed that Theo's barbs only make to the list
by way of the _receiver_ - meaning, IMO he sets the
standard for only offlist strong language. It would
be a good standard to follow.
Dereck
This is getting ridiculous! The guy said he was under
attack.(!) What is the point of a _misc_ list anyway?
He's not clogging the dev list!
The responses here are totally out of line. Haven't
any of you guys EVER had a desperate situation before?
Sheesh.
--- Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
I just lurk on this list. But UML modeling is not BS when used in some places.
In Linux or BSD programming, though, it would only really work for user
applications that are more OOP; UML isn't easy to do in C. [No need to whack
me, I know that OOP can be done in ANSI C but it usually is not.]
Messages like this are the reason I lurk here but seldom say anything.
Yes, we all have our crosses to bear - and some people have the bad luck of
never working with intelligent people.
--- On Wed, 5/5/10, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> From: Marco Peereboom
> Subject: Re: OT - UML, can someone stat
, I'm unafraid of a flame if you want to start it. But I also have a
3-year-old, so pointless back-and-forth is something I'm adept at right now.
--- On Wed, 5/5/10, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote:
> From: Christiano F. Haesbaert
> Subject: Re: OT - UML, can someone state that it wo
Yep, you are correct. So, can I get your phone number to send our clients to
when they need another pointless opinion intended to start a flame?
Shake out your head gear. There is a difference between "user programs" and
"system programs". The overwhelming majority of user-land programs are d
be archived as well.
--- On Thu, 5/6/10, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> From: Marco Peereboom
> Subject: Re: OT - UML, can someone state that it works ?
> To: "dereck"
> Cc: "Christiano F. Haesbaert" , "OpenBSD Questions"
> Date: Thursday, May 6, 2010, 1:40 A
Straw man and false analogy in one post. Batting 1000% so far.
--- On Thu, 5/6/10, VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote:
> From: VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO
> Subject: Re: OT - UML, can someone state that it works ?
> To: dereckhask...@yahoo.com, haesba...@haesbaert.org,
lars.cura...@gmail.com, vt...@c
> Why don't YOU provide an example of some USEFUL program in
> Java?
>
You are joking, right? Much of your day-to-day life activity (silently) works
in Java. For one example: most banking and financial firms have multiple
millions in investment in Java back office, Java Web Services and Web P
14 matches
Mail list logo
