Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wish list"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I wonder how we can restructure it so there is one discussion area for each item on the page, rather than one discussion for the whole page. | I wonder how we can restructure it so there is one discussion area for each item on the page, rather than one discussion for the whole page. | ||
:We need a proper bug-tracker, I think. Then we can get a much better idea of what's going on. P.S. Remember to sign comments with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>: [[User:Karaken12|karaken12]] 13:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | :We need a proper bug-tracker, I think. Then we can get a much better idea of what's going on. P.S. Remember to sign comments with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>: [[User:Karaken12|karaken12]] 13:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::Think you already know, but buzilla is avaliable. http://gpl.openqm.com/bugzilla/ -[[User:Diccon|Diccon]] 14:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 10: | Line 11: | ||
::::: :) Its ok Tom, not offended, just throwing ideas about, and when the person who was meant to know the details (Glen and TomP) asks what this is then i get the feeling i missed the jist of it lol. As far as i understood, there was something with Procs which needed doing, Martin had suggested it was a big job but he would do it. And it never got done, thus killing the XML output. Possibly the qproc rewrite, but i know nothing :) -[[User:Diccon|Diccon]] 19:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC) | ::::: :) Its ok Tom, not offended, just throwing ideas about, and when the person who was meant to know the details (Glen and TomP) asks what this is then i get the feeling i missed the jist of it lol. As far as i understood, there was something with Procs which needed doing, Martin had suggested it was a big job but he would do it. And it never got done, thus killing the XML output. Possibly the qproc rewrite, but i know nothing :) -[[User:Diccon|Diccon]] 19:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
:::::: I can't necessarily speak for Glen, but as I recall, you are correct. It was the rewrite of QPROC (which, I beleive, Glen was waiting on) as this was needed to be able to 'plug' the xml stuff into it, so as to not have to duplicate anything. This is something that deserves to be on this list, if anyone would want to attempt it. -[[User:Tomh|Tomh]] 20:00, 6 December 2008 | :::::: I can't necessarily speak for Glen, but as I recall, you are correct. It was the rewrite of QPROC (which, I beleive, Glen was waiting on) as this was needed to be able to 'plug' the xml stuff into it, so as to not have to duplicate anything. This is something that deserves to be on this list, if anyone would want to attempt it. -[[User:Tomh|Tomh]] 20:00, 6 December 2008 | ||
| + | :::::::Ok, good start. Glen, when you can. What form of access do you need. (I may look up the orginal dialog on this as i know Glen has his hands full) -[[User:Diccon|Diccon]] 18:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *BASIC Dictionary utility | ||
| + | Reason a threw up the "BASIC Dictionary utility" was to try and encourage use of the dictionarys. It is one of Pick's greatest strengths, especially in the age of recognising the sugnificance of Meta data. There may already be neat ways to do this, perhaps OConv(i have my concerns this isnt very effecient). [[User:Diccon|Diccon]] 14:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 14:29, 22 January 2009
I wonder how we can restructure it so there is one discussion area for each item on the page, rather than one discussion for the whole page.
- We need a proper bug-tracker, I think. Then we can get a much better idea of what's going on. P.S. Remember to sign comments with ~~~~: karaken12 13:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Think you already know, but buzilla is avaliable. http://gpl.openqm.com/bugzilla/ -Diccon 14:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
"QPROC system call." - Could we have more information on this? -Tomh 13:17, 1 December 2008
- I was just whacking down Glen B's requirement for proceeding with his XML parser/engine. Glen, TomP you know more about this than i do Diccon 22:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, I'm not quite sure what the issue is here. :o) -karaken12 00:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Screw it, removed it, was just trying to get the XML parser 'un blocked'. Previously I got lots of "ahh *nods*" responses -Diccon 03:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry if I offended, I was just trying to figure out what you meant. This helps, you talking about the 'qproc rewrite'? This sounds like it may be important, and a monumental undertaking. -Tomh 548am 2 December 2008
- :) Its ok Tom, not offended, just throwing ideas about, and when the person who was meant to know the details (Glen and TomP) asks what this is then i get the feeling i missed the jist of it lol. As far as i understood, there was something with Procs which needed doing, Martin had suggested it was a big job but he would do it. And it never got done, thus killing the XML output. Possibly the qproc rewrite, but i know nothing :) -Diccon 19:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- I can't necessarily speak for Glen, but as I recall, you are correct. It was the rewrite of QPROC (which, I beleive, Glen was waiting on) as this was needed to be able to 'plug' the xml stuff into it, so as to not have to duplicate anything. This is something that deserves to be on this list, if anyone would want to attempt it. -Tomh 20:00, 6 December 2008
- Ok, good start. Glen, when you can. What form of access do you need. (I may look up the orginal dialog on this as i know Glen has his hands full) -Diccon 18:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- I can't necessarily speak for Glen, but as I recall, you are correct. It was the rewrite of QPROC (which, I beleive, Glen was waiting on) as this was needed to be able to 'plug' the xml stuff into it, so as to not have to duplicate anything. This is something that deserves to be on this list, if anyone would want to attempt it. -Tomh 20:00, 6 December 2008
- :) Its ok Tom, not offended, just throwing ideas about, and when the person who was meant to know the details (Glen and TomP) asks what this is then i get the feeling i missed the jist of it lol. As far as i understood, there was something with Procs which needed doing, Martin had suggested it was a big job but he would do it. And it never got done, thus killing the XML output. Possibly the qproc rewrite, but i know nothing :) -Diccon 19:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry if I offended, I was just trying to figure out what you meant. This helps, you talking about the 'qproc rewrite'? This sounds like it may be important, and a monumental undertaking. -Tomh 548am 2 December 2008
- Screw it, removed it, was just trying to get the XML parser 'un blocked'. Previously I got lots of "ahh *nods*" responses -Diccon 03:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, I'm not quite sure what the issue is here. :o) -karaken12 00:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- BASIC Dictionary utility
Reason a threw up the "BASIC Dictionary utility" was to try and encourage use of the dictionarys. It is one of Pick's greatest strengths, especially in the age of recognising the sugnificance of Meta data. There may already be neat ways to do this, perhaps OConv(i have my concerns this isnt very effecient). Diccon 14:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
