<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="https://dev1galaxy.org/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=599&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Dev1 Galaxy Forum / Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
		<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=599</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD).]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 22:38:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1477#p1477</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I just try to compile this Ted, both gtk2 and motif variants seems to behave fine:</p><p> <a href="http://postimg.org/image/jfhuojbf1/" rel="nofollow"><span class="postimg"><img src="http://s14.postimg.org/jfhuojbf1/2017_05_15_23_10_02_1920x1080.jpg" alt="2017_05_15_23_10_02_1920x1080.jpg" /></span></a> <a href="http://postimg.org/image/rk1wn7etx/" rel="nofollow"><span class="postimg"><img src="http://s18.postimg.org/rk1wn7etx/2017_05_15_23_10_38_1920x1080.jpg" alt="2017_05_15_23_10_38_1920x1080.jpg" /></span></a></p><p> Can&#039;t say which one is which with similar theme, only diff i spotted is that motif variant uses 2+ less memory or so.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (smoki)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 22:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1477#p1477</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1456#p1456</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>spartrekus wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>1) Let&#039;s talk about TeD. <a href="https://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/" rel="nofollow">https://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/</a><br />I know Debian rejected this Motif software. <br />Would it be possible that you keep it into your DEVUAN repositories?</p><p>2) Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)</p></div></blockquote></div><p> I think Debian reason to remove TeD was not interface but licence:</p><p> <a href="https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=501638" rel="nofollow">https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo … bug=501638</a></p><p> So non-free and non-redistributable, which is something that can&#039;t be even in non-free repo.</p><p> edit: BTW TeD is GTK2 software by default even upstream now as i see, so to get motif version you might wanna compile it to get that GUI anyway.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (smoki)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 10:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1456#p1456</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1451#p1451</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>It&#039;s a nice idea, but just as with FLTK software, which I really like, somebody has to have the skill &amp; interest to maintain the packages.</p><p>I&#039;d love to see a distro made up of alternate toolkits, one per kit, but again, there has to be someone skilled &amp; interested enough to do it.</p><p>I don&#039;t have the skills, or the time, so I just settle for a lightweight distro using a Window Manager instead. <img src="https://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (FOSSuser)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 08:01:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1451#p1451</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1446#p1446</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>If someone (perhaps you?) adopts abandoned software and packages it properly for Devuan, it will eventually work its way into the Devuan repos.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (golinux)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2017 20:25:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1446#p1446</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1442#p1442</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello,</p><p>I am very surprised that the best of tiny, minimalist, efficient, reliable softwares aren&#039;t maintained and some of them disappear. The best example is TeD. Next to it, we could talk about Pathetic Writer and Siag. </p><p>1) Let&#039;s talk about TeD. <a href="https://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/" rel="nofollow">https://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/</a><br />I know Debian rejected this Motif software. <br />Would it be possible that you keep it into your DEVUAN repositories?</p><p>2) Why excellent, non for business, Motif softwares will die? (Ex.TeD)</p><p>Devuan is still not a business&#039;ed distribution. It would be good to have efficient softwares, which could be into Devuan without caring about Debian that much. Debian does what it wants.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (spartrekus)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2017 19:31:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1442#p1442</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
