Why, yes. Yes, I am a character designer that works in the game industry. How could you tell???
… it’s very impressive you could notice without even seeing the boobs or the “armour”.
See, the thing is... I have too many websites, or “web-thingies” in general. So I decided to kill one of them, and turn it into a “Planet” site, aggregating feeds from all others. This way you can read everything in one place. Enjoy!
Oh. To see (or write!) comments, you need to go to each post on its original site. To do that, click on the orange title (**not** the black site title on an orange bar, the orange title below that).
Refreshingly different. It’s nice to not worry about saving or tabs anymore, just tell it what file you want. It feels more like all files in my project are open in background tabs, than none. It doesn’t (yet?) have so much of an ecosystem, so it lacks some features I’d like — especially Stylus syntax — but it’s a solid editor.
Especially liked: the new take on files. Built-in preview panes. The installer contains 3 files; not quite as good as a system-integrated .deb, but you have to appreciate the no-nonsense approach. The “save when blur” approach is a beautiful match for Meteor; I do some coding, then switch my focus to the browser, and just have to wait for things to reload without any further action from me.
similar-but-different problem as with Atom; I don’t know how it decides where’s my project root. It does seem to index a reasonable set of files, but how? Also, it indexes a lot of stuff I don’t need, notably .js and .css files built by Meteor; I tried the blacklist options but it took some effort to get it right.
Final verdict: this might be The One, but possibly it’s not quite mature enough yet…
Update (June 14th): I don’t know where my brain was when I wrote the “dislike” section above. Obviously, it’s a project-centric app, and each window is a project; you choose the project root when you open the window.
So yeah, it kind of does have the same problem as Atom though, in that I can’t open a file from outside the project e.g. to read/reference or copy code. There’s a more native version coming up, based on node-webkit, and now that’s what I’m running here; with that it’s possible to open arbitrary files from the command line, but not the UI (yet).
This is currently my main editor. I still feel it’s not quite mature, but it’s really nice and I feel it has the potential to speed me up a bit more.
This thing feels quite polished, clearly has momentum, and a nice ecosystem of add-ons. Unfortunately my workflow requires tons of tabs, and there seems to be no way to navigate to other tabs using the keyboard, so that became a show-stopper really early on and I couldn’t evaluate too deeply.
Especially liked: embedded terminal (handy to run my meteor app on a tab, rather than keeping a separate terminal taking precious screen real estate). Installer can build a .deb and installing that gets the app neatly integrated in my system, with launcher and all.
Especially disliked: bit of a project-centric design, each window is operating on one folder, and opening a file outside that tree automagically opens a new window. You can move the tab from that new window to the old one, but closing the new window closes all tabs that originated there. If the first file I open is not at the tree root, trying to open something else will also cause a new window; so probably the best is to start the window by opening the folder itself. Being a Github (the company) project, you’d expect it would traverse the tree up looking for a .git at least, so it would guess where your project starts?
Also for such a project-centric design, it’s surprising that it doesn’t save a project and/or workspace when I close it, so that next time I can pick up where I left off.
Final verdict: good-looking but I’m not sure it fits my style/workflow. That may change though.
The Time Lords are trying to come back, using a leftover plot point from the metaplot of a previous season, but if they do come back the whole universe might be destroyed. A former enemy (who just had a big origin explanation/retcon) joins forces with the Doctor to prevent disaster, and a former companion hated by many fans and loved by others makes a cameo. In the end the Doctor regenerates, although the regeneration takes much longer than has been previously established, and sends the TARDIS crashing, as a cliffhanger for the next Doctor’s first episode. Oh, and the Time Lords do *not* come back.
That was not the best episode, but a nice enough, worthy sendoff for Tennant. Looking forward to the Matt Smith era!
Oh wait… damn wibbly wobbly timey-wimey writing.
I don’t usually share chain posts, but this is really great… I always wondered how this is done.
(via Luciano Ramalho)
(and therefore of course also Game of Thrones ending)
This is all speculation, but I’m like 96% sure, so I’m putting it below the fold :-)
IMO, closing down an airport because people who leave nearby complain of the noise is civically backwards and a shit excuse. I mean, the airport was there first, and you moved in knowing that full well, no? One of the few things that irk me in Germany is this knee-jerk anti-DDR tendency to put the whining of the few over the needs of the many. What about the people who live near Tegel and want the airport there? What about the stupid farce of Google Street View where business lose customers because one idiot in the building above didn’t want their Balkondekor viewable by all? It’s silly and we all lose.
Reposting this here so people can see it without logging in to Facebook; photo by Justine Lera. This absolutely disgusting excuse for advertisement for a bar was seen in Schönhauser Allee 10, Berlin, this morning. If you’re in Berlin or planning to come here soon, mark the name and place and make sure they never see your money. If you have the time, file a complaint.
so yes, I can change my opinion. After reading this, I can’t not drop it.
I’ve been meaning to post something about The Big Bang Theory for a while now but it’s taken me ‘till now to really understand what it is about the show that makes me uncomfortable. I’m not exactly a believer in the whole “only write about the things you like, don’t trash the things you don’t” trend which seems to be plaguing comments sections in negative articles lately, but I wanted to be able to really examine why I don’t like TBBT rather than just slagging it off. My main questions being - Why don’t I like this anymore? Why do I feel uncomfortable watching it? And why do I get so annoyed when I see people sing its praises online? The thing which really sparked this post was seeing a raft of comments on Facebook, below the last round of voting in Television Without Pity’s Tubey Awards, claiming The Big Bang Theory to be “the best comedy on TV”. This made me angry so instead of posting an impulsive comment calling out their bad taste which I’d probably regret later, I decided to really analyse why seeing comments like that made me so mad when previously, although I didn’t really love the show, I’d never considered myself as disliking The Big Bang Theory.
Hell, I even have season one on dvd, it’s sitting right between Battlestar Galactica and Bored To Death in my alphabetised collection.
And here, I think, is where my problem with The Big Bang Theory lies…
apparently, I’m now into “neoclassical”, but of the more pop/electronic persuasion rather than darkwave (which I find boring). My current fave is probably Red Moon. The automated recommendation engines I know of have failed me completely (they give me other popular anime music, regardless of style). So here I resort to you; if you know anything that sounds a bit like that (or Summer Apples or Magia or Lacrimosa or Eden — yeah they’re all anime openings or endings, sue me at will), your recommendation is welcome.
Does that sound familiar? I put it to you that a hipster is basically a “Dark Side” geek. Same behaviour (mostly), but channelled into slightly different interests — eg obscure music instead of obscure sci-fi.
Having been recently stuck with git at work, I had a momentary lapse this morning, and convinced myself I needed co-located branches (git-style) to work on my game, which is of course under bzr as any project maintained by sane people should be.
It turns out I didn't, and nobody, ever, does. Here's what to do instead.
The most common argument for colo is a source tree for a large compiled project, where you have hundreds of .o files you don't want to be recompiling all the time.
In our case, we keep the generated player avatars (.png) inside the source tree, which, to be honest, is not a very brilliant design, but it's also not quite a high priority to fix right now.
Now, based on these arguments, some very clever minds have been hard at work to add colo support to bzr for the last few years; it's been a core feature since 2.5.0 (2012-02-24).
Looking at these arguments as someone who understands the bzr model well, a catch soon becomes apparent: these aren't, in any way, arguments for co-located branches. They are, rather, arguments for co-located trees, and those bzr already does quite well. (Or rather, it doesn't need to.)
You see, trees only coexist with branches by default. The second greatest argument about bzr is that it allows you to work your way; and the power that unleashes is often underestimated.
(In case you're curious and haven't yet heard this rant from me, the #1 greatest argument is that the model is sane and based on a good understanding of version control and real-life workflows, as opposed to the snapshotty-hashy-hacky of certain other VCSes. But let's not digress too much.)
First, put your branches somewhere; a shared repository is preferred to save you lots of space and (if it's going to be remote) network traffic.
$ cd /somewhere/bzr-repos $ mkdir my-project $ bzr init-repo --no-trees my-project $ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr push /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/trunk $ bzr branch /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/trunk /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/my-branch $ bzr branch /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/trunk /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/other-branch
2a: Use lightweight checkouts. This is best if the branches are local, and will make your switches a little faster. Back up your data first; while this won't destroy anything in the history, it may hose files in the working tree or make your checkout unusable.
$ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr bind /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/trunk $ bzr reconfigure --lightweight-checkout
2b: Use heavyweight (regular) checkouts. This is better if you're working directly with remote branches, as you can then work offline; if you're always online, it essentially trades some disk space for bandwidth, so take your pick.
$ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr bind /somewhere/bzr-repos/my-project/trunk $ bzr reconfigure --checkout # probably unnecessary, unless it was lightweight before
3: Happy branch-switching:
$ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr switch my-branch $ (do stuff) $ bzr switch other-branch $ (do stuff) $ bzr switch trunk $ bzr merge my-branch
etc. The relative branch specs work because they're relative to the current branch location, rather than the working tree.
4: Create new branch:
$ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr switch -b a-new-branch
5: Delete old branches:
$ cd /where-your-sources-are/my-project $ bzr switch trunk $ bzr merge my-branch $ bzr rmbranch my-branch
In fact, since the Bazaar developers are, in fact, a clever bunch, the 2.5.0+ co-located branches do pretty much exactly this, except the branch storage is hidden inside the .bzr dir of your tree. So if you still want to do it "the git way", sure, go ahead and do it. In a non-bound branch, bzr switch -b new-branch will set up your branch and tree for co-located work, and create "new-branch" co-located to where you are.
The benefit of doing it explicitly, as I describe here (apart from the fact that it worked before 2.5.0, but I'm 8 months too late for that argument), is that you still keep the best of both words: you can have co-located checkouts, but you can also easily have more than one checkout; for example (and this would be awesome at work), a "wip" checkout normally bound to the feature branch you're currently working on, and a bugfix checkout bound to trunk or to your "maintenance" branch. Or, if you're a gatekeeper, those same two plus a third "master" checkout for merging submissions (including those from your own feature branches, if you're so inclined).
Aaand yet another early social network bites the dust. Goodbye, Multiply; we had fun.
I imported the poetry I had there into tumblr. Since I stopped using Multiply long before I started using LiveJournal, they transition nicely into the old blog posts that I had already imported over earlier. So now it looks like I’m a super-hipster and have been using tumblr since 2004, which is not only before it was cool, but over 2 years before it even existed. Yaaaaaaaaaaaay! Er.
The phenomenon where a subculture is running *out* of fashion and generally derided as passe, and then the “true believers” cling to it with even more pride, taking everybody else’s derision as a badge of true membership as opposed to all the fad people. “Truester”? “Postster”? “Wanester”?