Comments for a little madness http://www.alittlemadness.com A man needs a little madness, or else he never dares cut the rope and be free. -Nikos Kazantzakis Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:14:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 Comment on Ext Discovers Step 2 of the Slashdot Business Model? by Joshua Gertzen http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/04/24/ext-discovers-step-2-of-the-slashdot-business-model/#comment-112671 Joshua Gertzen Sat, 23 Aug 2008 05:41:54 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/04/24/ext-discovers-step-2-of-the-slashdot-business-model/#comment-112671 Having built a very complex Ajax framework myself ( www.thinwire.org ), I can definitely understand both sides of the argument here. What you guys don't realize is that it's incredibly difficult (on a magnitude I can't begin to describe) to accomplish what extjs has done. And it is true that organizations can take an LGPL'd ExtJS, build a product, such as a GUI builder, and sell it without having to pay the ExtJS folks anything. I realized this among many other things when choosing to bow out of ThinWire development ( http://tinyurl.com/5kp8z2 ) and focus on TileStack instead. Personally, I wouldn't want to be in the tools business ever again... it's incredibly draining and it's insanely difficult to make money at it because developers are used to getting dev tools for free. The problem here is that ExtJS built it's reputation on the back of much more liberal open source licenses, and then it pulled a switch job. Personally, I don't think that's too cool. If you want to be a commercial entity, then start out that way and build the company the old fashion way. Don't pull a bait and switch like this. A better approach would have been to split the codebase and try to create an "Enterprise" version that would be purely commercial (i.e. what MySQL did). One last thing... Alex... I like ya man... but Dojo can't touch what these guys have done. Having built a very complex Ajax framework myself ( www.thinwire.org ), I can definitely understand both sides of the argument here. What you guys don’t realize is that it’s incredibly difficult (on a magnitude I can’t begin to describe) to accomplish what extjs has done.

And it is true that organizations can take an LGPL’d ExtJS, build a product, such as a GUI builder, and sell it without having to pay the ExtJS folks anything. I realized this among many other things when choosing to bow out of ThinWire development ( http://tinyurl.com/5kp8z2 ) and focus on TileStack instead. Personally, I wouldn’t want to be in the tools business ever again… it’s incredibly draining and it’s insanely difficult to make money at it because developers are used to getting dev tools for free.

The problem here is that ExtJS built it’s reputation on the back of much more liberal open source licenses, and then it pulled a switch job. Personally, I don’t think that’s too cool. If you want to be a commercial entity, then start out that way and build the company the old fashion way. Don’t pull a bait and switch like this. A better approach would have been to split the codebase and try to create an “Enterprise” version that would be purely commercial (i.e. what MySQL did).

One last thing… Alex… I like ya man… but Dojo can’t touch what these guys have done.

]]> Comment on Ajax vs Caching vs Firefox 3 by Code Swimming » Firefox Caching Bug http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-111408 Code Swimming » Firefox Caching Bug Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:54:23 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-111408 [...] order, otherwise it will cache it even if the headers correctly specify not to.  More info here and [...] […] order, otherwise it will cache it even if the headers correctly specify not to.  More info here and […]

]]> Comment on 10 Things I Hate About Wikis by S A GOULD http://www.alittlemadness.com/2006/04/19/10-things-i-hate-about-wikis/#comment-110890 S A GOULD Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:36:26 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2006/04/19/10-things-i-hate-about-wikis/#comment-110890 Looking further into wikiness, i find NO CONSISTENCY in specific repeating terms, and use incredibly poor photography that should have been, yes, EDITED/CROPPED. All of things that as a university publications person I try to maintain. As in, if I have a publication with twenty faculty members and 18 of the photos are acceptable quality and two want me to run a Polaroid with them, I cannot do that as it makes it seem that those TWO people are somehow lesser individuals. And it is just plain DAMN JARRING, trying to read an article on more than one person, when the terms are different. When they aren't. As in: • XXX is "spouse" • XXX is "domestic partner" • XXX isn't even FREAKIN' MARRIED to the person they have been linked with. Drives me crazy. And I can do that by myself. Looking further into wikiness, i find NO CONSISTENCY in specific repeating terms, and use incredibly poor photography that should have been, yes, EDITED/CROPPED. All of things that as a university publications person I try to maintain.
As in, if I have a publication with twenty faculty members and 18 of the photos are acceptable quality and two want me to run a Polaroid with them, I cannot do that as it makes it seem that those TWO people are somehow lesser individuals.

And it is just plain DAMN JARRING, trying to read an article on more than one person, when the terms are different. When they aren’t. As in:
• XXX is “spouse”
• XXX is “domestic partner”
• XXX isn’t even FREAKIN’ MARRIED to the person they have been linked with.

Drives me crazy. And I can do that by myself.

]]> Comment on Don’t Be Attached to Your Code by James French http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/08/06/dont-be-attached-to-your-code/#comment-110722 James French Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:02:31 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/08/06/dont-be-attached-to-your-code/#comment-110722 I love deleting code. Deleting code often implies that it has been superceded by something better, which implies progress. It is also somewhat cathartic. I love deleting code. Deleting code often implies that it has been superceded by something better, which implies progress. It is also somewhat cathartic.

]]> Comment on 10 Things I Hate About Wikis by S A GOULD http://www.alittlemadness.com/2006/04/19/10-things-i-hate-about-wikis/#comment-109175 S A GOULD Sun, 10 Aug 2008 07:12:27 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2006/04/19/10-things-i-hate-about-wikis/#comment-109175 Hey guys... all I know is that I have only used Wiki SERIOUSLY twice and both times it was so incorrect and blatantly biased on specific individuals that- had I the time- or could EASILY post a comment (as I can here), I would have. But I seriously don't believe that I should have the burden-of-proof in correcting factual errors (not opinions). I don't have the time to jump through the hoops to correct information that is a matter of public record. And I don't care how earnest they may/may not be in wanting to correct entries, I don't care. I go by your actions and not your words. Any of you have serious reservations about Wiki, feel free to contact me. Hey guys… all I know is that I have only used Wiki SERIOUSLY twice and both times it was so incorrect and blatantly biased on specific individuals that- had I the time- or could EASILY post a comment (as I can here), I would have.

But I seriously don’t believe that I should have the burden-of-proof in correcting factual errors (not opinions). I don’t have the time to jump through the hoops to correct information that is a matter of public record. And I don’t care how earnest they may/may not be in wanting to correct entries, I don’t care. I go by your actions and not your words.

Any of you have serious reservations about Wiki, feel free to contact me.

]]> Comment on Don’t Be Attached to Your Code by Adam http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/08/06/dont-be-attached-to-your-code/#comment-108392 Adam Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:30:41 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/08/06/dont-be-attached-to-your-code/#comment-108392 Don't be afraid to use your version control system. "Deleted" code can always be recovered later if you absolutely need it. Acknowledging this helps get over a lot of the initial psychological hurdle. With the DVCS choices available today there's no excuse for not using version control no matter how small the project. Don’t be afraid to use your version control system. “Deleted” code can always be recovered later if you absolutely need it. Acknowledging this helps get over a lot of the initial psychological hurdle. With the DVCS choices available today there’s no excuse for not using version control no matter how small the project.

]]> Comment on Running Selenium Headless by Jason http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/03/05/running-selenium-headless/#comment-108255 Jason Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:06:47 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/03/05/running-selenium-headless/#comment-108255 Hi Jim, It looks like the file that Selenium is identifying as your firefox executable (/usr/bin/firefox-bin, or whatever that links to) is not a binary file, but a script. Selenium expects to find the binary file itself, and refuses to launch Firefox from a script. The solution is to find where the actual binary file is (you can probably tell from reading script and seeing what it launches), and point Selenium at it by setting the browser to: *firefox /path/to/the/real/binary when you create your Selenium instance. Hi Jim,

It looks like the file that Selenium is identifying as your firefox executable (/usr/bin/firefox-bin, or whatever that links to) is not a binary file, but a script. Selenium expects to find the binary file itself, and refuses to launch Firefox from a script. The solution is to find where the actual binary file is (you can probably tell from reading script and seeing what it launches), and point Selenium at it by setting the browser to:

*firefox /path/to/the/real/binary

when you create your Selenium instance.

]]> Comment on Running Selenium Headless by Jim http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/03/05/running-selenium-headless/#comment-108155 Jim Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:21:39 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/03/05/running-selenium-headless/#comment-108155 So, I was wondering if you'd be able to give me a hand with this.. I have Xvfb running (I think), and firefox-bin now runs on my headless gentoo box (when I run /usr/bin/firefox). However, when I try to run a Selenium script, the RC server errors with: java.lang.RuntimeException: File was a script file, not a real executable: /usr/bin/firefox-bin and the actual error from the attempted test run is: http://pastebin.com/m265d6539 Any idea where I should get started? It's definitely some sort of a setup issue - not a code bug (I have the same exact test running just fine on my not-so-headless ubuntu box). So, something with the environment vars? Or finding and moving the firefox binary somewhere else? So, I was wondering if you’d be able to give me a hand with this.. I have Xvfb running (I think), and firefox-bin now runs on my headless gentoo box (when I run /usr/bin/firefox). However, when I try to run a Selenium script, the RC server errors with:

java.lang.RuntimeException: File was a script file, not a real executable: /usr/bin/firefox-bin

and the actual error from the attempted test run is:
http://pastebin.com/m265d6539

Any idea where I should get started? It’s definitely some sort of a setup issue - not a code bug (I have the same exact test running just fine on my not-so-headless ubuntu box). So, something with the environment vars? Or finding and moving the firefox binary somewhere else?

]]> Comment on Ajax vs Caching vs Firefox 3 by Jason http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-106246 Jason Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:28:54 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-106246 Hi Nicholas, Thanks for the comment - I should have mentioned this technique as it can also be very effective. It does have the benefit of being easier than trying to debug caching behaviour, where what you see can be deceiving. I have even noticed that some of the JavaScript libraries have built in support for adding a timestamp parameter to Ajax requests. Hi Nicholas,

Thanks for the comment - I should have mentioned this technique as it can also be very effective. It does have the benefit of being easier than trying to debug caching behaviour, where what you see can be deceiving. I have even noticed that some of the JavaScript libraries have built in support for adding a timestamp parameter to Ajax requests.

]]> Comment on Ajax vs Caching vs Firefox 3 by Nicholas http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-106207 Nicholas Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:37:55 +0000 http://www.alittlemadness.com/2008/07/30/ajax-vs-caching-vs-firefox-3/#comment-106207 I kept hitting this issue and rather than messing with cache configuration headers, I simply appended a parameter on the end of the (GET) URL using the javascript provided time in ms. That way, each url is unique and will never be read from cache. Hopefully your server side will gracefully ignore the unexpected extra parameter. I kept hitting this issue and rather than messing with cache configuration headers, I simply appended a parameter on the end of the (GET) URL using the javascript provided time in ms. That way, each url is unique and will never be read from cache. Hopefully your server side will gracefully ignore the unexpected extra parameter.

]]>