That assumes that working more hours translates to more money. Our bonus "takes into account" overtime, but it is not directly for every xxx hours we get xxx more. So I may make more a t my profession, but that does not mean that monetary it will save me money if I hire someone else to do work around the house.
Now, there is probably some type of heuristic I could use to determine at what point it is not worth my time, since some jobs would take me to long or I do not have the skill, but my point is that is little more complicated than just looking at pay.
But GPL is very much about the whole GPL ecosystem. Pieces of BSD-style licensed software work pretty well as part of GPL ecosystem, as can be seen by the multitude of such software, but a fully BSD-based ecosystem would simply not work. If it did, then Linux would not have pushed *BSD operating systems to the side lines, where hardly anybody cares about them.
My understanding is that the BSD development environment (very controlled) is what helped Linux. Why would the type of licensing hurt BSD? Do you think a BSD license wouldn't work for Linux's development environment?
We have that abomination at work. The poor quality of Outlook + google sync + Google is being used as a reason for explaining why Outlook is bad. At home I use Linux so I tend to be biased towards most Linux items, but Outlook's by far my favorite email / productivity client. (My wife uses Outlook to connect to Google "normally" with no problems.)
I'll bite. What would you do to make it shorter? That seems pretty sane to me. I'm assuming the language's methods are determined by the signature. There's not that much (maybe the ) you could remove and still determine what is being passed in.
Except nspluginwrapper doesn't seem to handle flash 10.1 very well. For example, don't right click on the flash test at http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/ Sadly nspluginwrapper's web site and subversion repository have fallen off the net.
solution is to use latest firefox 3.6.4;explained heayah: http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=53036
I understand that it's different than synpatic, but it is indeed in Debian. It's just simply been re-branded as "Debian Software Center".
Gotcha, I don't follow Ubuntu so I wasn't aware of the change. That software also comes with Debian as well.
I guess if you have a team who are going to have lots of questions because they aren't totally clear on what they're doing, stuffing them all in a room is a good idea. A well thought out and documented project plan would alleviate a lot of those problems though. I can imagine a room with 10 developers who can shout questions to each other would create an amazingly high amount of unwanted distractions.
I like some of the other posters suggestions of having a conference room type environment where people can meet to discuss things. I'm in a cubicle environment, so I can second that having loud people (aka my boss) shouting in the room can be distracting.*
* There has been times when overhearing conversations is good. Sometimes people are discussing a procedure/bug/system that you're aware of and can help guide them. Or if they're discussing something that will effect you. Having people in offices, you lose that but I don't think the advantages out-weigh the disadvantages of a cubicle setting.
You mean synaptic? It's available on Debian as well as Ubuntu.
if you keep waiting you end up with Debian that has delays longer than Ubuntu has between (non-LTS) releases.
I guess I could try one of the non-Debian based distros but my experiences with them have all been bad, worse than anything Ubuntu ever managed to do to Debian. Unless there are really bad deal breakers, I'd rather they get it out there and start the people on and the bugs filed while upstream might still bother to fix them. But yeah, backing up and being able to roll back to the last version is very much an advantage..
It sounds like you're more familiar with Debian's stable releases. I find that Debian testing is a pretty good balance between "stability" and "newness of software". I don't know if that would be something to consider
Added plus: using a rolling release so once on a computer I don't have to reinstall it again.
The longer the title, the less important the job.