Log in

No account? Create an account
LogJam [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ website | LogJam ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Aug. 30th, 2001|07:49 pm]
jtunison writes:
Hey fans of journal clients!

The "patch" to LogJam is now nearly 12,000 lines. It keeps getting better and better. Since the last tarball I sent, it has:

- configuration dialogs
- new account druid
- much much sexier interface (icons for menus and such)
- local journal support
- cut/copy/paste (never counts as a feature until you have to implement it under X :p )

It is still not on par with LogJam in terms of implementing:
- friends
- meta LJ submissions
- proxy support

Work starts for me on Sep 10, which means that development may be stymied for a few months. I hope one day the project will form the basis for a "next-generation" LogJam, but it isn't there yet. I still think the code is very valuable for Advogato users, and so I plan on releasing a tarball publicly very shortly.

My deadline for the release is Sep 5, so that I have time to fix bugs and make a secondary release before work starts. I will send you a preview tarball tonight -- please help test! I'd love to hear your comments.

A sourceforge account has been set up for the new project under the name DaVinci.

John Tunison

I'll add to this: the home page is http://john.tunison.net/code/davinci/ .

I'm not sure what'll happen to LogJam, as John has basically written his own journaling client after reading the code of LogJam... if you create a journal for DaVinci, John, I'll link to it from here.

[User Picture]From: czircon
2001-08-30 08:25 pm (UTC)
That "sexy" interface looks pretty frightening... is that a wizard?!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bradfitz
2001-08-30 10:18 pm (UTC)
I believe they're called "druids" in Gnome. :-P
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: czircon
2001-08-30 10:39 pm (UTC)

Holy smokes! I've never been so glad I don't use gnome.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: foobar
2001-08-31 06:50 am (UTC)


... I totally know what you mean! Having more options sux0rz!

Just because something has a "wizard" or a "druid" or whatever the hell they choose to call it does not mean you -have- to use it. Well, maybe for some M$ products it does but even most of those are optional from my experience.

Options are good, broad appeal is positive, single-minded fanaticism is stupid.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: czircon
2001-08-31 06:37 pm (UTC)

Re: Yeah...

No need to get snippy. My objection is not with the actual wizards (as long as they're optional) but with the trend toward dumbing everything down for the lowest common denominator.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: foobar
2001-08-31 06:51 pm (UTC)

Re: Yeah...

Uh huh. :)

I'm sure that's what you meant, but it's definitely not what you said. I just get tired of some of the crap I read sometimes, it's so cool to bash things, but most people I've met don't have any reason for bashing them other than that it's fashionable.

What's wrong with making things accessible to people? As long as the full functionality is there behind the scenes for those who know enough and want to play with it, I think dumbing down the front is great. Accessibility is a plus, even accessibility to idiots. Face it, if MS products weren't so damned easy, they wouldn't be so popular, and we wouldn't be considered "rebels"
for using things like Linux or FreeBSD, we'd be mainstream.

Then again I think most linux users wouldn't be linux users if it wasn't the "underdog" os.

Anyways, enough of this. Next time just say what you mean. It's easy to jump on the bandwagon and bash the mainstream. If that's not what you're doing, don't act like it. If that is what you're doing, deal with it when people don't like it. :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: czircon
2001-09-01 02:03 pm (UTC)

Re: Yeah...

How was I not saying what I meant? I said I'd never been so glad I didn't use gnome, and that was the truth. I do loathe wizards, not because it's fashionable, but because they are so useless. You say "as long as the full functionality is there etc.", but as you dumb down the interface more and more, you get more and more clueless users and the demand for the full functionality decreases until it's no longer supported. Many parts of newer versions of windows force you to use wizards. Say what you will, but I don't think it's a good thing when 90% of the user base for your software consists of idiots.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: evan
2001-09-01 02:44 pm (UTC)

Re: Yeah...

I agree.

Part of the lure of developing for Linux is that I get to assume that my users are competent.
To me, a GUI is only better if it gets the job done faster. I'd use the keyboard exclusively if it weren't faster to use the mouse.

It's a difficult balance these days, pleasing the majority while not annoying the core.

(This may not be so much an issue with wizards/druids in particular, but just with UI design in general.)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jtunison
2001-08-31 09:56 am (UTC)
Yeah, man, GUIs are for losers. Real men telnet to port 80 of livejournal.com, and use the LJ client/server protocol to type their journal in directly.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: seanb
2001-09-01 02:59 pm (UTC)
Hmm. I'll have to try that....

I do like LogJam's command-line interface,though. It's nice to be able to write my posts in vi without having to use any ugly cut-and-paste to transfer them to LogJam
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: evan
2001-09-01 03:32 pm (UTC)
Brad worked for a bit on an LJ client that seemed like a really good idea: it just loads $EDITOR with a certain file format, then interprets the output and posts it.

So you'd get vi popping up with something like:


Shouldn't be more than 50 lines of Perl, really, but I've never wanted it enough to actually write it.

It'd be nice if I could embed the vi editor component in GTK... I wonder if they're working on a Bonobo component. :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: seanb
2001-09-01 08:30 pm (UTC)
After a little bit of research, I found a discussion on the vim-dev mailing list about making a vim bonobo component.

There has been some work done to specify a GNOME interface for editor components, which is available at http://cvs.gnome.org/lxr/source/gnomacs/idl/desktop-editor.idl

I think there have been efforts made to get this working with xemacs and elvis.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)