|
Well,
I guess you know me now. I'd also recommend Soundbooth to edit audio .wav converted from .cda; only if you've got Premier Pro. That, to save audio reversed.
First.
|
|
|
|
|
|
At best this still only shows articles updated within the past year. There's no window shopping / browse all area anymore?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe after 2 hours and 20 mins, I'm the first...
YOU'RE A DINOSAUR!!
|
|
|
|
|
You're too kind my man.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
oh sh*t i missed this thread.
MCAD
---
|
|
|
|
|
We always assumed that anyone browsing would give up after the 100th, so this page[^] should sort you out.
However, I have had on my TODO for ages now a "Hit me" button that would take you to a random article. Any interest in something like that?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: We always assumed that anyone browsing would give up after the 100th, so this page[^] should sort you out.
I know CP is much, much bigger these days, but how would anyone just stroll across an article now?
Ironically enough, this is the same issue search engines have and why technologies like Gopher died out.
Chris Maunder wrote: However, I have had on my TODO for ages now a "Hit me" button that would take you to a random article. Any interest in something like that?
If it were like a random highly voted article that would be cool. Kinda like CP meets Tinder, could be an addictive page to be on.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Since I got ya here man, am I missing something or is all that's required to update an article's thumbnail is simply replacing the image file with a new one with the same name and then Ctrl+F5 the listing page like a wild beast?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
The thumbnail is automatically generated by taking the first (non-small) image in the article content. I could make it so you can override this if there was enough wailing and gnashing of teeth.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
When I simply replaced the generated image with a better looking one though, the listing page went back to the default image rather than the show the new one or the old generated one. Was hoping to put something a bit fancier in its place.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: When I simply replaced the generated image with a better looking one though
Our system then replaces that with a less better looking one.
What if I simply added the option "Let me provide my own thumbnail file" checkbox that, if checked, will make the system not overwrite the file you upload?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That would be awesome. My only concern is people abusing it and trying spam on CP, but that's what editors are for I suppose. What about that being like a perk for gold + members at least?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
It's easy enough to abuse - and moderate - as it stands already. We should be good.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
We've been using git at work and after a few months of using it... it still drives me a bit mad.
For example: git pull origin branch
Should in theory be a specialized version of: git pull
...yet you end up in a weird limbo (now thinks your local is ahead of origin/branch) because the tracking pointer somehow doesn't get updated when you specify the branch (it does with the generic "git pull").
Anyone deal with git regularly? I keep finding some of these little inconsistencies that are driving me mad. I may just be partial to SVN since I used that for years but it seems like everything is overly complex for no good reason in git.
Don't get me started with hash values being used as commit identifiers. 
|
|
|
|
|
I completely agree. I may (very likely) be a dinosaur, but the particular use of git at one customer has me thinking of leaving.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the git developers have been quoted as saying their approach was, "if in doubt, do the opposite of what was done in SVN"... it seems like an absolutely idiotic approach to something. Instead of learning from the mistakes in the past, you're bound to invent new mistakes... that's what I see in git, completely new mistakes (innovative mistakes in design?  ).
|
|
|
|
|
Albert Holguin wrote: Don't get me started with hash values being used as commit identifiers
First they tried to use commit comments, but then they saw yours 
Ain't it weird? It was hacked together by a crazy egomaniac in an I'll-show-you all-nighter, so get in contact with the crazy egomanic I'll-show-you side of yours, and you'll be fine.
Here's the (at this point practically required) "Don't do that, then" - advise:
git fetch to update your local repo without making any other changes, then
git merge or git rebase to integrate your changes.
If the merge/rebase goes bonkers, you can always go back to "before limbo".
Srsly: Find a workflow that works. I found it pretty awkward that virtually every operation requires at least two commands, but you get used to it, then yo uget hooked on it.
|
|
|
|
|
peterchen wrote: I found it pretty awkward that virtually every operation requires at least two commands
That's where the git pull is supposed to come in... but when git pull <origin> <branch> gives you a different result than git pull.... it's just another hardly documented "feature".
By the way, I was doing the pull instead of the fetch/merge because it was for a repo that I hadn't changed locally, so I was just trying to sync with the origin.
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree. I hate Git. I'll take SVN over Git any day! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-----
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-----
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
What drives me mad about git is that you can't get a previous version of a single file pulled down into a separate directory to be able to look at the old code and the new code at the same time(or I haven't found the way at least). Comparing versions of files is sometimes very helpful in figuring out the bug.
Much rather prefer source control systems that work on files not directory structures like SubVersion or heaven forbid old school, file locking PVCS. With file locking I know no one can mess with my work and I know who I need to talk to in case the file I want is locked.
source code CONTROL system.
|
|
|
|
|
MarkTJohnson wrote: What drives me mad about git is that you can't get a previous version of a single file pulled down into a separate directory to be able to look at the old code and the new code at the same time(
We use ToroiseGit and it's trivial to Show Log, click the commit, right click the file that was changed and compare with the current.
(However this only gives you a quick shortcut to viewing files changed in a given commit, so some hunting will be required, but there is a search feature in the TortoiseGit Log window)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I have wondered what it was for quite a while, but the only scrum player I know here has brain damage from, evidently, too many in-game concussions, and can hardly explain the time of day.
This video (family safe) helped: [^].
«If you search in Google for 'no-one ever got fired for buying IBM:' the top-hit is the Wikipedia article on 'Fear, uncertainty and doubt'» What does that tell you about sanity in these times?
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for that Bill! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Far too coordinated for an Agile scrum.
(Actually I feel the better rugby analogies are ruck and maul[^])
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
