Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Javascript > WebOS Project seeking for developers

Reply
Thread Tools

WebOS Project seeking for developers

 
 
Rorist
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
Hello,

I'm on a project of "yet another WebOS on the market" and I'm looking
for motivated developers/designers.
The project is well ahead, base direction are set. What I would need
is great ideas and motivated coders to consolidate the core,
and solve high end problems about WebOS'es in general. Here is a quick
presentation of the technologies involved and key features:
- Using Google's Protocol Buffers for internal data
- Using mootools 1.2 as a base
- Fully Open Source Software, see below
- Framework oriented project, so it would be easy to create
applications for the OS. (GUI, Windows, Widgets, ...)
- Modular, load and install application easily
- Multiuser based (need security work)
- Bazaar as the VCS, Launchpad as the developement platform
- Server side is currently in PHP, but this is not the main part of
the project. So it's possible to migrate to Python.
- Using the Apple's work on Human Interface to create the best user
experience possible (lot of work here)

The future of the project has to be made, I like the idea of Cloud
Computing, and that's the point of Python. At the moment, it's all
about the user interface, but the control over the server behind would
be very important, and that could be your mission if you are
interested.

I'm looking for designers too. Actually, it's quite ready to create
some "themes" by just creating an other "default theme". It's all made
from the begining to have theme. Any help welcome on that, even just a
pure image model, or a complete CSS/XHTML theme. I already have a logo
designer, you can contact him if you are interested.

The project is FULLY open source, and even more, the core is under the
Public Domain.

Enough talk, for more information, you can go to:
main site: http://takos.info
developement: https://launchpad.net/takos
contact me: https://launchpad.net/~jbaubort

Hope to hear from you soon.
Amicably, JBA
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
Rorist wrote:
> I'm on a project of "yet another WebOS on the market" and I'm looking
> for motivated developers/designers.
> [...]
> Here is a quick presentation of the technologies involved and key
> features:
> - Using Google's Protocol Buffers for internal data
> - Using mootools 1.2 as a base


No, thanks.


PointedEars
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rorist
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
I bet you don't like Mootools,
but can you please elaborate the No ?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
Rorist wrote:
> I bet you don't like Mootools,


Preferences don't enter into it. I don't develop for or with monolithic
junk code if I can avoid it.

> but can you please elaborate the No ?


Ohh, /that/? It's a common expression of denial.


PointedEars
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rorist
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Preferences don't enter into it. *I don't develop for or with monolithic
> junk code if I can avoid it.


I can argument the choice of a framework, Mootools particularly.

- mootools is light enough that it's flexible, i'm not stuck with
complicated methods that i have to hack all around
- crossbrowser is painless with a good framework
- mootools is one of the fastest around with Dojo
- don't reinvent the wheel
- Mootools is modular, so I don't have to use all of the framework
(wich I actually did for now, until i know wich part I really don't
need)

> Ohh, /that/? It's a common expression of denial.

No, I'm a learner, and such limited response don't really help me get
the point of what could be improved or understand why my choices would
be wrong from your point of view.

Thanks anyway for giving me a reason to argument such an important
part of my little project.

Cheer.
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Mark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
On Dec 21, 10:17*am, Rorist <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > Preferences don't enter into it. *I don't develop for or with monolithic
> > junk code if I can avoid it.

>
> I can argument the choice of a framework, Mootools particularly.
>
> - mootools is light enough that it's flexible, i'm not stuck with


Light enough? Everything is relative.

> complicated methods that i have to hack all around


It is an homage to Prototype, so it has lots of unneeded nonsense to
"work around" prototypal inheritance. As with Prototype, syntactic
sugar is used at the lowest levels, which is a far cry from efficient.

> - crossbrowser is painless with a good framework


Name a good cross-browser framework. Last I checked, MooTools used
brain-dead browser sniffing, so it is at best multi-browser and the
affected code is instantly dated.

> - mootools is one of the fastest around with Dojo


This is the type of generalized nonsense I have come to expect from
advocates of these sorts of frameworks. Relatively speaking, Dojo and
MooTools are slugs.

> - don't reinvent the wheel


Pollywannacracker? MooTools is neither useful, nor an invention.

> - Mootools is modular, so I don't have to use all of the framework


I'll give it that, but who needs modular junk?

> (wich I actually did for now, until i know wich part I really don't
> need)


Good luck with that!

>
> > Ohh, /that/? *It's a common expression of denial.

>
> No, I'm a learner, and such limited response don't really help me get


Paradoxically, you lecture about MooTools as if you are an authority
on browser scripting.

> the point of what could be improved or understand why my choices would
> be wrong from your point of view.


Try searching the archive (or learning the first thing about browser
scripting.)

>
> Thanks anyway for giving me a reason to argument such an important
> part of my little project.


You have thrown the game away. Your "little" Web OS project is doomed
from the start.

>
> Cheer.


Boo.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rorist
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
THAT's actually argumentation. Thanks for your anwser David.

> Relatively speaking, Dojo and MooTools are slugs.

Relative to what ? My comparaison was relative to other JS*frameworks.

I can understand lot's of people don't find fw usefull, so why bother
starting an other flamewar on the subject ?
If your have such concern, you may help me build a low level framework
wich will handle all the crossbrowser routines.

>Paradoxically, you lecture about MooTools as if you are an authority on browser scripting.

I'm certainly not, but as I tested some of the fw out there, it was a
good start without having to spend monthes bother with crossbrowser
(yes, it's all about that).

>Try searching the archive (or learning the first thing about browser scripting.)

I learned a lot on that project, I wasn't aware JS could be that
powerfull.
A lot of people complaining that JS is not intented to do what we use
it for now (and it's probably true), but it can.

>You have thrown the game away. Your "little" Web OS project is doomed from the start.

You are probably right, because the main goal of the project is to
have FUN and LEARN such things.

Best regards.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
Rorist wrote:
>> You have thrown the game away. Your "little" Web OS project is doomed
>> from the start.

> You are probably right, because the main goal of the project is to have
> FUN and LEARN such things.


(Please don't SHOUT here.)

But that is the problem with not only using these libraries but having an
operating system(!) be based on them. For their authors have yet to take
the first step in the learning curve themselves, that is, to take everything
that one reads about JavaScript with a handful of salt.

So, if you really want to learn something in this project, you will have to
start from scratch; at least you will have to do *thorough* investigation on
every piece of foreign code that you use, and your own code. And in order
to make an assessment about code quality and best practices, you will have
to learn the basics of the language and the APIs that can be used with it.
This newsgroup can help there.

Please learn to post: <http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting>


PointedEars
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Mark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
On Dec 21, 11:17*am, Rorist <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> THAT's actually argumentation. Thanks for your anwser David.


WHAT is?

>
> > Relatively speaking, Dojo and MooTools are slugs.

>
> Relative to what ? My comparaison was relative to other JS*frameworks.


That is difficult at best to test empirically. But by inspecting the
scripts, you can determine that the upper bounds of their efficiency
are well below what can be accomplished with well-designed, context-
specific code.

>
> I can understand lot's of people don't find fw usefull, so why bother
> starting an other flamewar on the subject ?


You don't understand. The "flame wars" you refer to are nothing but
the shrill ravings of the hopelessly indoctrinated. They are
typically waged by people without proper names or the ability to write
coherent sentences (e.g. jQuery Rulez!!!!) On the contrary, numerous
real arguments have been posted here over the years that serve to
debunk these frameworks beyond a shadow of a doubt.

> If your have such concern, you may help me build a low level framework
> wich will handle all the crossbrowser routines.


May I? Perhaps I already have.

>
> >Paradoxically, you lecture about MooTools as if you are an authority on browser scripting.

>
> I'm certainly not, but as I tested some of the fw out there, it was a
> good start without having to spend monthes bother with crossbrowser
> (yes, it's all about that).


But if your goal is cross-browser compatibility, these frameworks fall
well short. It doesn't matter how many bloggers and neophytes claim
otherwise.

>
> >Try searching the archive (or learning the first thing about browser scripting.)

>
> I learned a lot on that project, I wasn't aware JS could be that
> powerfull.


What project?

> A lot of people complaining that JS is not intented to do what we use
> it for now (and it's probably true), but it can.


People complain about all sorts of things, including posts in this
group that denigrate frameworks.

>
> >You have thrown the game away. *Your "little" Web OS project is doomedfrom the start.

>
> You are probably right, because the main goal of the project is to
> have FUN and LEARN such things.


Then I am right. It is no fun at all relying on a black box of
browser sniffing.

[snip]
 
Reply With Quote
 
John G Harris
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2008
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 at 19:30:21, in comp.lang.javascript, Rorist wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I'm on a project of "yet another WebOS on the market" and

<snip>

What is a WebOS ?

John
--
John Harris
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HP TouchPad Running WebOS Lawrence D'Oliveiro NZ Computing 0 06-02-2011 05:55 AM
HP Confirms WebOS Tablets & Netbooks Lawrence D'Oliveiro NZ Computing 0 07-02-2010 09:11 AM
Seeking old post on developers who like IDEs vs developers who likesimple languages Steve Ferg Python 10 05-20-2009 12:33 PM
To know how to integrate msword in my webos Seemanavale Software 0 01-04-2009 10:11 AM
seeking convention: project directory for project info 7rans Ruby 3 08-04-2006 06:18 PM



Advertisments