51–60 of 90 posts
I read up on this editor a little bit, but the thing that gets me is: what's wrong with emacs? I don't see anything this editor does that emacs can't do.
emacs? The thing that gets me about you emacs users is, what's wrong with vim?
I read up on this editor a little bit, but the thing that gets me is: what's wrong with emacs? I don't see anything this editor does that emacs can't do.
emacs? The thing that gets me about you emacs users is, what's wrong with vim?
I've almost given up with Sublime Text. I have a bug with the Linux version on xubuntu which causes the application window to shudder when I scroll. It's something to do with smooth scrolling. I can't register at their forums as it requires a keyword which you can only get by emailing keyword@sublimetext.com - I've tried three times and each time I've been ignored. I've also tried email the other ST employee, but bee…
Have you emailed sales@sublimetext.com?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and has been completely stable for a year or more If this is true, why are the releases still labelled 'dev' releases? How is anyone supposed to know that it's actually a stable release they should be using? Research it on HN comment threads?
> If this is true, why are the releases still labelled 'dev' releases? Because it's an arbitrary label. Or because John wants to hook something additional up or polish something before giving it his "3.0" blessing. Or because it crashes on Linux and needs to fix that too... But not because there's any issue with it on OS X, at least not for me, and I'm a heavy (8-10 hours per day) user.
Regardless, if you want people to know that a release is ready for use by people who want a stable release, you label it a final release, right? Presumably the developer(s) do not believe it is ready for wide use. Whether they are being overly conservative or not is I suppose another question.
But it seems silly to suggest that everyone should do research on their own to discover something labelled 'beta' or 'dev' should really be considered the latest stable release.
I love this editor and it makes me sad to see how the project is stalled. In 2002 the investors behind Blender launched the "Free Blender" campaign. They asked for 100,000 EUR as a one-time fee for open sourcing it. At the time the project was dying as a proprietary product. The investors got the money and today Blender is a healthy open source project. I would love to see something similar with Sublime Text. The aut…
> I love this editor and it makes me sad to see how the project is stalled. Stalled? It just had an update. It's also in the 3rd version, under development, which came just a couple of months after the 2nd version had been released. He could just have released ST2 and keep it at that version for 3-4 years. Instead he immediately started development ST3, which had frenetic development in the first months, and has been…
Huh. Do you think there will be an ST4 beta/dev release before there's an ST3 stable release? I wonder if the developer has just decided to label all his releases beta from now on?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love this editor and it makes me sad to see how the project is stalled. Stalled? It just had an update. It's also in the 3rd version, under development, which came just a couple of months after the 2nd version had been released. He could just have released ST2 and keep it at that version for 3-4 years. Instead he immediately started development ST3, which had frenetic development in the first months, and has been…
> and has been completely stable for a year or more If this is true, why are the releases still labelled 'dev' releases? How is anyone supposed to know that it's actually a stable release they should be using? Research it on HN comment threads?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of ST users are former Textmate users, too. So we've certainly been through this rigamarole before.
Textmate 2 did exactly what Blender did. Went open source, has a healthy developer community, and has had steady updates for a couple of years. They still call it "Alpha" but it is very stable and I use it every day.
I read up on this editor a little bit, but the thing that gets me is: what's wrong with emacs? I don't see anything this editor does that emacs can't do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hardly still alive . These aren't even cosmetic changes, honestly!
Why does it need cosmetic changes? There are a few actual bugs to sort out first.