 |
 |
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 >