dhouwn wrote:I was talking about patches that add new features or improvements (like performance improvements) rather than fixes. My point was that they don't just add it because there are certain rules, they kind of peer-review the code, there are coding standards and for the fixes they want unit/regression/integration tests written. I like the way they handle things, it's certainly more professional than what some smaller software companies do (I am speaking out of experience).
No matter what the reason they hold off, its a hold off. I hate use this as an example and I apologize to Giorgio in advance as I had promised not to bring it up but you leave me no choice. If they had a peer review system in place we wouldn't have that whole ABP/NS issue, that's all I am going to say and you are entitled to believe what you want based on whatever justifies it for you, I won't challenge your personal beliefs on the subject.
No, I don't have any evidence to back up the contrary, but I am also not making assumption about it, am I?
Yes you did, let me clear that when you call someone's statement as nothing more than assumption with emphatic belief, you are claiming you know something other than what I said, that's an assumption when there is no proof, since you can't show that I did make an assumption, for all you know, I have my sources and reason but you don't know that. So before challenging someone's statement, come prepared. Words are cheap, actions speak louder. Since I am not prepared to present any proof on the subject because I don't have to justify my statements, while you can claim it as what you want, but it has as much merit as your statement, if not more, because if I had to and the forum was appropriate, I can back up what I say but I don't see that need here. The only reason I am even replying to you is out of respect because you have chosen to comment on my statements and therefore I am etiquette bound to respond.
Okay, then I correct myself: "It looks to me like you are just making assumptions, since you didn't present any evidence to back up your hypothesis that the Google devs are being reluctant to implement an interface for something like NoScript and that this is because Google is also an ad company."
You can reword it all you want, I refer you to my previous response and you are entitled to say the sun rotates around the earth and we rotate around the moon, that's your right, but doesn't make it right because you are entitled to say it. Again I refer you to my previous response, since I don't need to justify myself here, we are discussing opinions and just because mine is based on fact, doesn't mean I have to justify it to you or anyone else, you can take for what its worth and in any way you wish.
Are you speaking of the 2-3 Chromium bug tracker entries concerning this? I believe I have read them mostly (and I have star[r]ed them too BTW). But I can't remember reading any statement from the Google devs that asserts your claims. If you have any direct links/quotations for this (maybe from the newsgroup or the IRC?) feel free to prove me wrong.
Indeed, among others. Same here, starred and waiting to see google's response on it which has been nonexistent and in many cases just belligerent when they do say something, like how dare we question the mighty giant who is living in the same bubble Yahoo did before it burst, that's why they are so desperate to make phones, OS, browser, and just about any tool on the planet designed to accumulate and hold all your information on THEIR system, you think you have privacy, you are sorely mistaken. If you are waiting for them to admit it, then you will be waiting a long time and I assure you it will be long after my bones are dust. So if that's your defense, not the most deductive way to go. Although I hear inductive reasoning is catching on when there is no other way to save face.
Okay, that may be an indication that it's not very high on their priority list, still it's not backing up the claims that this is because Google generates profit from advertising. Talk about libel…
Oh lord mighty, did we finally concede a little, hallelujah, I was beginning to think that I was talking to a google fanboy or some under cover developer that is wearing sheep's clothing
Not libel, the best defense against libel is the truth, you are talking to a state bar certified law man, so I know what I say and I mean every word, if I am libelous, bring on the lawsuits. Anyone? didn't think so. And unless you have a butt load of google stock, not sure why you care but good to see they got people who will be left disappointed when the truth is inevitably exposed, in the meantime, i guess everyone deserves a zealous defense.
It's one person's claim against another's. Maybe you are right, maybe not.
People die and after developing professionally for almost 20 years starting with Cobol, Fortran and Pascal, I have seen alot of <fill in the blank> come and go. Not dismissing what you say, after all M$ hired the ex-somebody to run their media division when the last guy was alleged to have lost them the market share by allowing apple itunes to get big and why not have the zune sooner. well better late than never I say. At least the zune hasn't been sued for poor production quality like iPod was (just google nano settlement if you need proof), see they are useful for some things, no denying that if you want an overload of results and information, google is the clear choice.
See here is the problem, you assume that because I said not always, I must not believe that people are ever considered an asset, I didn't say that, it was your conclusion. Afterall my friend who broke the 40-bit ssl encryption when at UCLA got a job at Netscape rather than go to jail for hacking, so there is always that it factor that they choose to exploit rather than lose. Of course, no one denied that, did I? You really need to take it less personal and listen to what is being said, not whose saying it and if they are different from what you believe, judge on the merits, don't automatically snip back at something because an alternative to your thinking was proposed. if this can't be an intelligent exchange, then its just a waste of both of our time and i will just have to walk away and be rude in not responding anymore if you can't take differing views with grace and the benefit of a doubt that you could be wrong, regardless of how certain you feel.
Perhaps. Or perhaps I am just trying to pose a counterbalance to your – as how I perceive it – one-sided rants. Maybe I am an harmony-loving person, always fighting for the equilibrium… Okay, enough of the nonsense!
And I gave you credit for it, what's your problem, if you are going to get belligerent then your point of view lends no credibility and as stated earlier is a waste of time. If you consider it nonesense, then stop spewing it. You get a response to what you say, nothing more, nothing less, you are making it personal and that's your downfall and often those who do, their point is not taken seriously because it lacks confidence, patience and consideration that your point of view may very well be wrong. At least I left the possibility for me being wrong, you leave no room and absolutes like that make you un-debatable as it is just a waste of time, so try to change your tactics from insults to actual intelligible responses, there is nothing wrong with not saying anything than to open up and remove all credibility. ok?
AFAIK, he has accepted some patches from outside so he could not just do it overnight. Personally, I wouldn't mind paying for it and I would mind even less it not being 'open source' anymore, since – like I said before – IMHO it's neither fish nor fowl concerning its 'openness' according to my definition right now.
Not without thorough testing, debugging and knowing exactly what is in it and cleaning it up to be efficient and "good" before he puts it in, but when you have volunteers with no knowledge trying to vet code, then its just asinine, as they don't have nearly enough if at all, anybody who is qualified enough as Giorgio to vet the code. Comparing Giorgio to the likes of AMO is an insult in itself. He is not a copycat, mimic, or even a faker who just coasts through things hoping that before the crap hits the fan someone catches it. I won't restate the writing on the wall again, I think by now we know, just not ready to accept it and that's fine. to each their own, I am ok with you thinking whatever you want it doesn't affect me, it only affects you what you think. One of AMO's rules for auto accepting and releasing updates or code for extensions is how many people voted for it, can you see the problem with that? no?
Speaking of which, wasn't the anniversary a not-so-long while ago?
Not long ago at all, and yet you vehemently defend the quality and authority of AMO, need I say more or you get where that's going? I mean for god sake they had the gaul to mark his code as malware, how dumb do you have to be do that? I mean common sense anyone? But google putting a framework for their own product promotion while not giving the API for NoScript is perfectly acceptable and non-fishy to you? I am speechless, which is saying something no?
Too bad. I should have read this before starting to write a reply.
Not really, as much as I enjoy a good debate, when your other half resorts to insults, loaded banter that is intended to only be flip, then it has no value. Discussion is worthwhile if ALL sides are considered and you don't come in with a preconceived notion of what is right and wrong. If you can't entertain the possibility that google is evil, then there no foundation for a productive and fruitful debate, because you will be biased to anything said in that regard, see what I mean? now, before you decide to throw my own words back at me and try to deflect or someone else for that matter, let me say that I have firm opinions of this and that, but I don't close my mind to a good argument, I simply close off and dismiss anything that starts to resemble a game of words and hair splitting and smoke and mirrors. Not productive. Its ok, you are welcome to write me in private if you like, you can continue to debate it in the open and have google crawl and save it for us for when one of us is proven right, we can look back and add a memo: told you so, signed (either you or me), now relax and don't take it so personally, in the grand scheme of things, none of this matters because I can't take any of it to the grave in which I will inevitably lie, so why bother clouding the soul in the process
please enjoy your week and feel free to drop me a line any time. As long as you promise to leave the baggage and any beef you have at the door, I always welcome a good discussion, it helps keep the mind sharp.
now where did I leave that gold medal, oh yeah it was just a dream
or was it? jokes aside, we are going senile, just at different rates, so I am in no rush to get to the front of the line, take care of yourself. have a beer on me
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/3.6.3
I just hope they are not blinders you got on and indoctrinated by the company line and kidding yourself. That would be an insanely rude awakening 
