Re: a good PHP editor

On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 00:21:47 -0700 impersonator of evan@coeus-group.com (Evan Nemerson) planted &I saw in php.general: >You wouldn't happen to be "...abridging the freedom of speech...", would >you??? > >No, not everyone knows about astalavista.box.sk. However, most of us do. Why? >Because people told us about it. I don't know about you, but I don't spend my >free time punching in random URI's. > >The word for this is NOT stealing. You are encouraged to download the >software by the manufacturer. All you are doing is modifying it. What? It's >against the EULA??? Ah, but that is why people use software like the >customizer... > I guess, since you kind of quoting me, you are trying to speak to i as well, without "compromizing" yourself with direct reference:). So, are you climing that by restricting free download officially (when it is not stated as demo/shareware/free), some manufacturers actually hidenly invite the opposite:) Well, some - may be - if they aRe cover for CIA or MOSSAD sayanim:), or in some very back-door-ed/minded plces like IsReal:): "Don't steal [international {sic}:] pancake from our pan":) If you put _right_ punctuation mark after "Don't" - you MAY actually treat it as intvitation for steal:) But in any case the word hewre IS "stealing" . What is this "CastoMizer" software, btw? >You don't need to be afraid of the police walking into your house and >scanning your computer- if you are wise, as apparently not all of us are. > Cum on:) It is all DUN remotely. And is - prerogative of FBI and thier counterparts in non US plces. (Are you a provoker fr. one of such "nice" bodies, by chance?:) And crimes do not justify "fight" with them by unjust means, breaking human rights. And Virtually evryThing can be faked, evidences included. > >I believe that quality software should be rewarded, and in this day and age >monetary gain is the main motivation for most people, and therefore the most >common reward. However, I believe that the people that ambushed Mr. Maletsky >are far worse people than he, for they assaulted him for speaking up. > In no way this is true. FutherMore, i _don't_ believe that self-confessions / pleas could be a main argument in process (contrary to AM*an "Just'ice" system principles). Objective evidences - although - yes. But only obtained by LEGAL means (wich do not includes appriory considering most subjects - guilty until proven innocent, and using it as a justification for buging/mind reading/etc:) In this concrete topic, i think that Mr. Maletski didn't have only himself in mind, and am confronting not him personally, but his statements. >Mr. Maletsky: Do not apologize to anyone for having the courage to speak up. >Those who would smite all intellectual opposition shall only grow weak over >time, while dragging the rest of humanity down with them. In order for us to >grow as a species, we must work together. > With criminals?:) (don't have Mr MM in mind:) I won't. >I thought that was what open source was all about- working together to better >humanity, not just ourselves. I still believe it is, but I believe that those >who ambushed Mr. Maletsky are disgraces to this cause. You should be using >ASP. > Open source is good when it is agreed upon by author/creator:) By circumstances, i use mostly free software, myself: although am not particularly interested in Source and hoping it 'll work as designed in bin. Hovewer the using of free software doesn't place you under the moral obligation to produce _only_ free (open source or not) software in exchange; as this use is not a communal things, but descreet agreements between you and evrey programm author, and not with a society at Large. > Regarding ASP, I started with PHP only because IT (and not an ASP) was supported on the server, where my original site was. And then I liked it for ability to having work DUN. The only (related to the topic) thing: I would prefer, that PHP engine should be shipped by _default_ with standard compiler (like ZEND or whatever) included, so that developing/distributing compiled scripts would be easier. > >-Evan Nemerson > evan@coeus-group.com > >Why do people with closed minds >always open their mouths? Just SharUp:) So who is against the FREE SPEACH?:), judge of closed minds:) -- LeoN to e-mail: cut "auto_no." if present. (.±.) to think - is to speak quietly, to speak - is to think aloud \~/ My posted articles archive: http://leo.portland.co.uk/doc00.htm