[puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
jm jones jm jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

 Why XFCE and not LXDE ? and why not gnome? Im just curious. Its
really an adventage in "speed"?

--
JM Jones

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Bernardo Barros Bernardo Barros
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

Personally I like KDE for everyday desktop use. I really don't see any
difference in performance compared to GNOME, and it looks nicer.

OpenBox is a good choice for very minimal desktop, I like it too. It's
really 'open'.

2010/10/2 jm jones <[hidden email]>:

>  Why XFCE and not LXDE ? and why not gnome? Im just curious. Its
> really an adventage in "speed"?
>
> --
> JM Jones
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Lukasz Jastrzebski Lukasz Jastrzebski
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

When p:d switched from dyne-based system that used fluxbox as a
default, to ubuntu-based model, XFCE was really lightweight (in terms
of ram and CPU cycles used), yet very elastic and intuitive. LXDE was
just starting as a mainstream software, there was lots of problems
that are now solved and some lacking things that are now implemented
in it. Openbox was also not as popular, as it is now. XFCE solved many
problems (like hardware support), that other (more simplistic) window
managers were unable to handle without some external software (so
using this would make lots of work for the team to spot what is needed
and choose solution).
I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those are
still vital nowadays.

Cheers,
Luke

On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Bernardo Barros
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Personally I like KDE for everyday desktop use. I really don't see any
> difference in performance compared to GNOME, and it looks nicer.
>
> OpenBox is a good choice for very minimal desktop, I like it too. It's
> really 'open'.
>
> 2010/10/2 jm jones <[hidden email]>:
>>  Why XFCE and not LXDE ? and why not gnome? Im just curious. Its
>> really an adventage in "speed"?
>>
>> --
>> JM Jones
>>
>> ---
>> [hidden email]
>> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
>> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>>
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Aymeric Mansoux Aymeric Mansoux
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

Lukasz Jastrzebski said :

> When p:d switched from dyne-based system that used fluxbox as a
> default, to ubuntu-based model, XFCE was really lightweight (in terms
> of ram and CPU cycles used), yet very elastic and intuitive. LXDE was
> just starting as a mainstream software, there was lots of problems
> that are now solved and some lacking things that are now implemented
> in it. Openbox was also not as popular, as it is now. XFCE solved many
> problems (like hardware support), that other (more simplistic) window
> managers were unable to handle without some external software (so
> using this would make lots of work for the team to spot what is needed
> and choose solution).
> I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
> default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those are
> still vital nowadays.

Yup :)
 

a.
--
http://su.kuri.mu


---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
jaromil jaromil
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?


> > I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
> > default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those
> > are still vital nowadays.
>
> Yup :)

don't you guys remember we had XFCE on dyne:bolic already?




---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
DanS DanS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:
>
>> > I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
>> > default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those
>> > are still vital nowadays.
>>
>> Yup :)
>
> don't you guys remember we had XFCE on dyne:bolic already?

But Lukasz said dyne:bolic used fluxbox by default, I'm guessing he is
correct? The issue is defaultness, not availability.

Would be interested to know, btw, what you think of LXDE, since it's
so fecking fashionable these days. Everyone who uses XFCE gets the
question "why aren't you using LXDE" which is a bit frustrating...

Dan

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
jaromil jaromil
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

hi Dan,

(fruity i'm cc'ing you since you are our LXDE expert)

On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 12:25:22PM +0100, Dan S wrote:

> 2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> > I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
> >> > default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those
> >> > are still vital nowadays.
> >>
> >> Yup :)
> >
> > don't you guys remember we had XFCE on dyne:bolic already?
>
> But Lukasz said dyne:bolic used fluxbox by default, I'm guessing he is
> correct? The issue is defaultness, not availability.

yes. XFCE hass been default in dyne:bolic since version 2.4.2 - before
pure:dyne ever existed. just a detail, among some others that were
neglected, you can see it in the News section on http://dynebolic.org
dated march 2007.

> Would be interested to know, btw, what you think of LXDE, since it's
> so fecking fashionable these days. Everyone who uses XFCE gets the
> question "why aren't you using LXDE" which is a bit frustrating...

premise about working together: last time we were open to share our
research with Bel Ami was about migration of dyne:III to Debian and a
few months after we've seen public announcements as "pure:dyne
abandons dyne:bolic for debian"...  however, as mentioned in this
thread, i'm still very much in favour to share research with
pure:dyne.

said that and thanks for your patience and understanding: yes we have
tested LXDE both on dyne:II and dyne:III, mostly fruity has do that in
the past 2 years and we have seen it does better than XFCE for many of
our requirements. fruity has a complete view on what can go well with
LXDE to complete the desktop experience and still stay lightweight,
but i'm not sure he is reading so i'll Cc: this to him.

ciao


- --
jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F  5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
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=
=aan5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Lukasz Jastrzebski Lukasz Jastrzebski
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

In reply to this post by DanS
Ciao!

> But Lukasz said dyne:bolic used fluxbox by default, I'm guessing he is
> correct? The issue is defaultness, not availability.

I wrote, or at least I had that in mind when writing, that when p:d
was d:b-based it was using fb (as a default). I'm aware of the fact
d:b was also bundled with some extra WMs, I usually customized it to
boot into fb, so anyway, whatever ;)

> Would be interested to know, btw, what you think of LXDE, since it's
> so fecking fashionable these days. Everyone who uses XFCE gets the
> question "why aren't you using LXDE" which is a bit frustrating...
>
> Dan

Well, its not a deal about the X software v. Y, but of a feature set,
stability and default resource usage one is comfortable with. All
about comfort and productivity, really.
I also find desktop wars to be pretty childish.

Cheers,
Luke

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Aymeric Mansoux Aymeric Mansoux
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

In reply to this post by jaromil
jaromil said :

> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 12:25:22PM +0100, Dan S wrote:
> > 2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > >> > I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
> > >> > default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those
> > >> > are still vital nowadays.
> > >>
> > >> Yup :)
> > >
> > > don't you guys remember we had XFCE on dyne:bolic already?
> >
> > But Lukasz said dyne:bolic used fluxbox by default, I'm guessing he is
> > correct? The issue is defaultness, not availability.
>
> yes. XFCE hass been default in dyne:bolic since version 2.4.2 - before
> pure:dyne ever existed. just a detail, among some others that were
> neglected, you can see it in the News section on http://dynebolic.org
> dated march 2007.

Talking about sharing research, we switched desktops based on a poll
back in 2006
http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2006-September/000721.html

At some point Alejo mentioned XFCE and the existence of a dyne module,
although dyne:bolic was still using Wmaker if I recall correctly.

Still in 2006, I made a newer XFCE module, based on the 4.4RC1 so that
everyone using the beta pure:dyne could test it. We got enough feedback
to see it as a serious candidate:
http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2006-September/000747.html

The point is that these discussions helped everyone to evaluate this
desktop and see it as a good candidate for the default desktop on both
our systems. Looking back I think it was a good decision, even though
XFCE got a bit heavier with the years.


> > Would be interested to know, btw, what you think of LXDE, since it's
> > so fecking fashionable these days. Everyone who uses XFCE gets the
> > question "why aren't you using LXDE" which is a bit frustrating...
>
> premise about working together: last time we were open to share our
> research with Bel Ami was about migration of dyne:III to Debian and a
> few months after we've seen public announcements as "pure:dyne
> abandons dyne:bolic for debian"...  

This is correct I met you in Amsterdam to talk about pure:dyne, debian
and Ubuntu. The agreement was that the puredyne dev would start a debian
repository and new iso on their own and that you will keep in touch with
us. At the time you were very busy and could not invest much energy on
dyne:III anyway. You were also considering stopping maintaining the
project and focus on other things, which is of course fine but was a
problem for us who wanted to update pure:dyne and were stuck for almost
a year with the same issues.
http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2007-February/001075.html

Which is why Heather, Marloes, Rob, Karsten, Claude, Chun, Anton and
myself had met in London a few months *before* this meeting with you, to
talk about the fact that pure:dyne had diverged a lot from dyne:II and
to decide if we wanted to keep on waiting for dyne:III or fork as we
were already only working in our own branch of dyne:II, on a different
code repos and stopped syncing with your core and SDK. This was a scary
decision of course as making a distro from scratch VS hacking an
existing core was a big jump. Scary but exciting too :)

The discussion started by looking at making our own core based on
LFS/BLFS live scripts but we also did a distro tour to check what was
available, and this is how we discovered Debian's live helper project,
fell in love with it and unanimously decided to use it for what we
called at the time pure:dyne-ng. The motivation was also to see that our
packages could be used by people outside of Puredyne itself.

Since then, it is sad to see that you keep a bitter memory of it and
keep pointing finger at me. In the past two years, I offered you to meet
or call several times, without response from you. The invitation is
still up.


> however, as mentioned in this
> thread, i'm still very much in favour to share research with
> pure:dyne.

It's free software, patches are welcome Jaromil, lots to do as you can
see here https://bugs.launchpad.net/puredyne


a.
--
http://su.kuri.mu


---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Lukasz Jastrzebski Lukasz Jastrzebski
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

Could you guys wash your laundry more privy? :P
Lower your blood pressure, raise glucose level. You all have been
doing a terrific job.

Cheers,
Luke

2010/10/5 Aymeric Mansoux <[hidden email]>:

> jaromil said :
>> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 12:25:22PM +0100, Dan S wrote:
>> > 2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:
>> > >
>> > >> > I guess that was the factors that pushed p:d devs to use XFCE as a
>> > >> > default environment in the not-so-distant past, and some of those
>> > >> > are still vital nowadays.
>> > >>
>> > >> Yup :)
>> > >
>> > > don't you guys remember we had XFCE on dyne:bolic already?
>> >
>> > But Lukasz said dyne:bolic used fluxbox by default, I'm guessing he is
>> > correct? The issue is defaultness, not availability.
>>
>> yes. XFCE hass been default in dyne:bolic since version 2.4.2 - before
>> pure:dyne ever existed. just a detail, among some others that were
>> neglected, you can see it in the News section on http://dynebolic.org
>> dated march 2007.
>
> Talking about sharing research, we switched desktops based on a poll
> back in 2006
> http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2006-September/000721.html
>
> At some point Alejo mentioned XFCE and the existence of a dyne module,
> although dyne:bolic was still using Wmaker if I recall correctly.
>
> Still in 2006, I made a newer XFCE module, based on the 4.4RC1 so that
> everyone using the beta pure:dyne could test it. We got enough feedback
> to see it as a serious candidate:
> http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2006-September/000747.html
>
> The point is that these discussions helped everyone to evaluate this
> desktop and see it as a good candidate for the default desktop on both
> our systems. Looking back I think it was a good decision, even though
> XFCE got a bit heavier with the years.
>
>
>> > Would be interested to know, btw, what you think of LXDE, since it's
>> > so fecking fashionable these days. Everyone who uses XFCE gets the
>> > question "why aren't you using LXDE" which is a bit frustrating...
>>
>> premise about working together: last time we were open to share our
>> research with Bel Ami was about migration of dyne:III to Debian and a
>> few months after we've seen public announcements as "pure:dyne
>> abandons dyne:bolic for debian"...
>
> This is correct I met you in Amsterdam to talk about pure:dyne, debian
> and Ubuntu. The agreement was that the puredyne dev would start a debian
> repository and new iso on their own and that you will keep in touch with
> us. At the time you were very busy and could not invest much energy on
> dyne:III anyway. You were also considering stopping maintaining the
> project and focus on other things, which is of course fine but was a
> problem for us who wanted to update pure:dyne and were stuck for almost
> a year with the same issues.
> http://lists.goto10.org/pipermail/puredyne/2007-February/001075.html
>
> Which is why Heather, Marloes, Rob, Karsten, Claude, Chun, Anton and
> myself had met in London a few months *before* this meeting with you, to
> talk about the fact that pure:dyne had diverged a lot from dyne:II and
> to decide if we wanted to keep on waiting for dyne:III or fork as we
> were already only working in our own branch of dyne:II, on a different
> code repos and stopped syncing with your core and SDK. This was a scary
> decision of course as making a distro from scratch VS hacking an
> existing core was a big jump. Scary but exciting too :)
>
> The discussion started by looking at making our own core based on
> LFS/BLFS live scripts but we also did a distro tour to check what was
> available, and this is how we discovered Debian's live helper project,
> fell in love with it and unanimously decided to use it for what we
> called at the time pure:dyne-ng. The motivation was also to see that our
> packages could be used by people outside of Puredyne itself.
>
> Since then, it is sad to see that you keep a bitter memory of it and
> keep pointing finger at me. In the past two years, I offered you to meet
> or call several times, without response from you. The invitation is
> still up.
>
>
>> however, as mentioned in this
>> thread, i'm still very much in favour to share research with
>> pure:dyne.
>
> It's free software, patches are welcome Jaromil, lots to do as you can
> see here https://bugs.launchpad.net/puredyne
>
>
> a.
> --
> http://su.kuri.mu
>
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
jaromil jaromil
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

hi Lukasz,

On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +0200, Lukasz Jastrzebski wrote:

> Could you guys wash your laundry more privy? :P Lower your blood
> pressure, raise glucose level. You all have been doing a terrific
> job.

well i think it's still pretty much a gentlemen's discussion he :)

it's just that my account of history and that of Aymeric's diverge and
in general we have a different interpretation of what sharing means.

but you are right mentioning that people is not interested in it.

thanks Dan for adding us back with a link on puredyne's webpage.

fruity has replied me privately saying he will do his best to give a
resume of the current state of LXDE from his past researches.

ciao


- --
jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F  5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
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=
=/KSb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
DanS DanS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> hi Lukasz,
>
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +0200, Lukasz Jastrzebski wrote:
>
>> Could you guys wash your laundry more privy? :P Lower your blood
>> pressure, raise glucose level. You all have been doing a terrific
>> job.
>
> well i think it's still pretty much a gentlemen's discussion he :)
>
> it's just that my account of history and that of Aymeric's diverge and
> in general we have a different interpretation of what sharing means.
>
> but you are right mentioning that people is not interested in it.

Actually I'm interested, helps me get a feel for the past of all this
stuff. I'm an odd case tho ;)


> thanks Dan for adding us back with a link on puredyne's webpage.
>
> fruity has replied me privately saying he will do his best to give a
> resume of the current state of LXDE from his past researches.
>
> ciao
>
>

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Damaru Damaru
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

it's indeed interesting to see the whole conception story and how dev
of open source software can
get gummy ~ for sure emotional stuff doesn't help productivity but
sometime helps creativity ;)



On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Dan S <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2010/10/5 jaromil <[hidden email]>:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> hi Lukasz,
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +0200, Lukasz Jastrzebski wrote:
>>
>>> Could you guys wash your laundry more privy? :P Lower your blood
>>> pressure, raise glucose level. You all have been doing a terrific
>>> job.
>>
>> well i think it's still pretty much a gentlemen's discussion he :)
>>
>> it's just that my account of history and that of Aymeric's diverge and
>> in general we have a different interpretation of what sharing means.
>>
>> but you are right mentioning that people is not interested in it.
>
> Actually I'm interested, helps me get a feel for the past of all this
> stuff. I'm an odd case tho ;)
>
>
>> thanks Dan for adding us back with a link on puredyne's webpage.
>>
>> fruity has replied me privately saying he will do his best to give a
>> resume of the current state of LXDE from his past researches.
>>
>> ciao
>>
>>
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Lukasz Jastrzebski Lukasz Jastrzebski
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

> it's indeed interesting to see the whole conception story and how dev
> of open source software can
> get gummy ~ for sure emotional stuff doesn't help productivity but
> sometime helps creativity ;)

No, geoffroy. It is devastating  for my personal motivation to see
what I saw what here was just starting.

People who *could* cooperate as an even, well-organized front of
European free code artists, are diverging, arguing about who invited
who and how many times and when they were inviting themselves to show
how "kind" they were to each other,  sticking needles here and there
in the same time.

Next step would be probably showing how much ones have done v. how
lazy were the others. (Or maybe this happened too?) Like there was no
microphones, webcams, chats and numerous events, or even holidays or
"just passing by" occasions to meet each other and cooperate (or
argue), or just take a sip of coffee together...
And working together both teams could have achieved way more common
goals, than separately. Sure, it needs some good will and other
resources on both sides.

Even *not arguing* on a public channel would be actually cool to see
if the teams or leaders can't cooperate too much.

Cheers,
Luke

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Damaru Damaru
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

>> it's indeed interesting to see the whole conception story and how dev
>> of open source software can
>> get gummy ~ for sure emotional stuff doesn't help productivity but
>> sometime helps creativity ;)
>
> No, geoffroy. It is devastating  for my personal motivation to see
> what I saw what here was just starting.
>
> Even *not arguing* on a public channel would be actually cool to see
> if the teams or leaders can't cooperate too much.
>
> Cheers,
> Luke

Are you arguing with me ?? ;)

keeping it in the light :)

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
jm jones jm jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

2010/10/6 geoffroy tremblay <[hidden email]>:

>>> it's indeed interesting to see the whole conception story and how dev
>>> of open source software can
>>> get gummy ~ for sure emotional stuff doesn't help productivity but
>>> sometime helps creativity ;)
>>
>> No, geoffroy. It is devastating  for my personal motivation to see
>> what I saw what here was just starting.
>>
>> Even *not arguing* on a public channel would be actually cool to see
>> if the teams or leaders can't cooperate too much.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Luke
>
> Are you arguing with me ?? ;)
>
> keeping it in the light :)
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>

Good vibrations people!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1GXdk_W4M0

--
Juan Manuel Jones

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
jaromil jaromil
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [puredyne] Why XFCE and not LXDE ?

In reply to this post by Aymeric Mansoux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



hi Aymeric,

On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 03:49:21PM +0200, Aymeric Mansoux wrote:

> In the past two years, I offered you to meet or call several times,
> without response from you. The invitation is still up.

one little thing first please be concrete and get back online on your
website at least one link to us.

then i have to say that in my personal and limited experience, meeting
with you often lead to manipulations on what really the meeting was
about, needing someone else to be a mediator or an actual witness; now
i'd be much more interested in joining the goto10 team members, than
you alone.

also, as far as i recall from a recent announcement, you left the
goto10 team, is that true?

ciao

- --
jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F  5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
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=
=doX6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne