Apologies, everyone (and especially Bohyun). You may still want to consider
pointing people to foss4lib as a useful resource, but amend it with the
following statement:

"Free and open source tools may not be the best tools. You might not even
NEED software to handle whatever problem you have. Please consider
contacting [log in to unmask] for further insight."

Personally, I was unaware of either of these issues. It's a good thing I
came here today for some edification.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Joe Hourcle
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> On Nov 1, 2012, at 5:02 PM, Ethan Gruber wrote:
>
> > Google is more useful than any reference book to find answers to
> > programming problems.
>
> Too bad they got rid of codesearch.
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2012, at 5:06 PM, Nate Hill wrote:
>
> > Huh.  Michael, I'd love to know more about why I should care about SASS.
> > I kinda like writing CSS.
> > I see why LESS http://lesscss.org/ makes sense, but help me under stand
> why
> > SASS does?
>
> For the most part, using *any* CSS pre-processor is better than not
> using one.
>
> LESS's problem was that it's javascript based ... so if they have
> JS off ... you've got nothing.  And it's got to be done for each user,
> rather than re-generate the files after you've made a modification.
> You can get around this with the 'lessc' compiler, and serve valid
> css files rather than having each client have to do the processing.
>
> They've also got different syntaxes, so it's really up to which one
> makes sense to you.
>
> Functionality wise ... I think they're about equal these days.  I suspect
> that if one comes up with a useful new feature, the other group will copy
> it.
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2012, at 5:21 PM, Suchy, Daniel wrote:
>
> > I can already feel the collective rolling of eyes for this, but what
> about
> > Twitter? It's not a guide or manual, but start following and engaging
> > talented developers and library geeks on Twitter and you'll soon have
> more
> > help than you know what to do with.  Plus, no Zoia ;)
>
>
> Too much misinformation:
>
>         http://twitter.com/danhooker/status/5630099300
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2012, at 5:06 PM, Kam Woods wrote:
>
> > foss4lib is a good resource that I'm sure many use, but isn't (as far as
> I
> > can tell) linked anywhere on the current code4lib site. How would this
> > differentiate itself from that?
>
> The best tool isn't necessarily free or open source.  (and it isn't
> necessarily
> software).
>
> So that being said ...
>
> my whiteboard.  And a digital camera ... none of that 'smartboard' crap.
>
>
> -Joe
>