Alas, there is no linux port.
Textmate2 Goes Open Source
271–280 of 314 posts
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#272It doesn't appear to be a code-dump to GitHub, which would be indicative of fading interest on behalf of the original developer. The ReadMe, build process, and licensing instructions all point towards this being a well planned Open Sourcing of a product. I'm pleased with this, and hopefully it will spur development of TM2, allowing it to truly compete with the up-and-coming Sublime Text 2.
It looks to me as though the source is freely downloadable from github if you want to compile it yourself, but the Mac installer version is being sold at its usual price.
Since you can certainly sell a GPL'ed app, is this "well-planned open sourcing" going to continue to sell the installer version, start giving it away, or discontinue it? I don't see any mention of this issue on either site, but maybe I just missed it.
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This doesn't make much sense. You say it appeared at the right time and was pretty and native on OS X. What better editors deserved the success it had that were available when TextMate was popular? The fact that there wasn't another editor that fulfilled all those "needs" at the time (mainly: simple, native looking) does not mean that it deserved it's success. What I'm saying is, it got its success not because it w…
> The fact that there wasn't another editor that fulfilled all those "needs" at the time (mainly: simple, native looking) does not mean that it deserved it's success. What I'm saying is, it got its success not because it was better than the competition but because there was no competition. What kind of doublespeak is that? If there's a race, and you're the only one who shows up, you deserve to win, period.
Uhh, the same doublespeak as pointing out that if you're the only one to show up for a race, you're also the one that came in last?
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You've never used Emacs, have you? I'm talking about light weight editors that support light weight scripting in a number of different languages. I consider emacs to be more IDE-like. That's admittedly a weak distinction though.
emacsclient is about as lightweight as it gets, and Cocoa Emacs itself (24.1.50.1, built from the Git repository on Savannah this afternoon) starts up in less than 5 seconds on my Mac. As for "scripting in a number of different languages", that's more of an anti-feature for me. Specifically, running Emacs in a Windows, FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris, ... VM in VMware Fusion, I can symlink the init files and site-lisp direct…
I agree that emacs is losing its stigma of being/feeling bloated. Also, lisp is finding more practical applications through clojure. It seems like emacs should be on the upswing. So, charts like this (taken with a small grain of salt) are puzzling:
http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=emacs&cmpt=q
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#275It doesn't appear to be a code-dump to GitHub, which would be indicative of fading interest on behalf of the original developer. The ReadMe, build process, and licensing instructions all point towards this being a well planned Open Sourcing of a product. I'm pleased with this, and hopefully it will spur development of TM2, allowing it to truly compete with the up-and-coming Sublime Text 2.
It looks to me as though the source is freely downloadable from github if you want to compile it yourself, but the Mac installer version is being sold at its usual price. Since you can certainly sell a GPL'ed app, is this "well-planned open sourcing" going to continue to sell the installer version, start giving it away, or discontinue it? I don't see any mention of this issue on either site, but maybe I just missed i…
There is no "installer version" of TextMate. It's just an ordinary application bundle. See for yourself — here's the 2.0 alpha posted on the Macromates blog; it will auto-update to the latest alpha:
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#276Awesome! Can someone comment on how probable it would be to port it to linux (and windows)?
OK, so I've been looking through the code and from what I see I suspect a big reason for the rewrite was to move huge chunks into platform-independent C++ for an ultimate Win32/Linux/Mac trifecta release (maybe for TM3). If so, this would explain why things got so bogged down. The actual layout/folding code, for example, is in C++. When it needs to draw it calls Core Graphics C functions. A lot of the other things li…
as ugly as it may look, it seems like targeting something like GNUStep may help out with the portability issues. then you really only need to worry about the Mac-specific APIs.
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
ST2 is native enough for me and cross-platform should be on the list of every programmer's requirements for a text editor. I use Vim on OS X right now and I like it but used ST2 just yesterday (odd timing). I agree with others that it is basically the TM2 we were waiting for.
> ST2 is native enough for me and cross-platform should be on the list of every programmer's requirements for a text editor. I used to feel this way. I worked really hard to make all my configs and editors act the same across OS X and a few unix platforms. Then one day I woke up and decided I just wanted to work with the best editor on the best platform. (Both personal, subjective opinions, of course.) And that choic…
The fact that they have a windows version is nice, but when I say cross platform I mostly mean Mac/Linux. It's one of the main reasons I chose vim in the first place. Mac/Linux/Windows GUI/Terminal. And not to start a flame war: OS X isn't getting any better for developers. It's ok. It's just not their main focus. Lucky for everyone Linux is rad and getting better all the time. Now if only there was a cross platform Fireworks like program I could switch for good...
And while it's unlikely: I may find myself in a position where I have to use Windows. I'll be glad not to need to learn a new editor I don't want to. Or maybe I'm away from my Macbook and I want to code? We aren't all complete masters of our own destiny like DHH. I like to be prepared. :)
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
ST2 is native enough for me and cross-platform should be on the list of every programmer's requirements for a text editor. I use Vim on OS X right now and I like it but used ST2 just yesterday (odd timing). I agree with others that it is basically the TM2 we were waiting for.
If you haven't heard of it, ST2 has something called "Vintage Mode" which adopts a fairly large subset of the Vi/m commands. It will completely change the command set of ST2 and gets close enough to Vi for most of my needs. Notably absent is the search/replace syntax of vim, but ST2's works well enough I suppose.
I turned on Vintage mode within the first hour. Pretty nice! Funny how the single thing that turns so many off of vim initially becomes the thing you can't live without when checking out other editors.
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree with your assertion. TM 1.x was an amazing piece of software and way better than numerous text editors out there at the time. Usability wise it was impressive, keyboard shortcuts made sense, creating your own snippets and extensions was a breeze, block mode was simpler than on any other text editor out there and there was support for most programming languages out of the box. Consider for a moment that Ged…
But gedit is pretty impressive, still! It's extendable too, maybe just not to the extent of Textmate.
> gedit is pretty impressive, still!
Yes, and it feels completely alien on OS X.
Re: Textmate2 Goes Open Source
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't matter. Git has plugins to pull from other repositories.
I've never used the git transfer plugins but I've had some past headaches moving to different source control systems. I usually just start a fresh repository with the latest snapshot and keep the old system available if anyone has to really go back that far (in my experience after a few weeks no one really ever has had to do this).
The product I'm working on most of the time started 2004 as a CVS repository, then was converted to svn where it spent a lot of time in and hen in 2009 it was converted to git where it lives ever since.
I've had no issues during either conversion (aside of mistyping an author name, but filter-branch helped). All branches were successfully transferred.
Now I wonder what kind of issues you were having.