I'll be unsubscribing shortly
StevenBlack
unsubscribing and walking away from Blueprint, branching 0.7 into my
own personal and private space.
So it's either someone get-a-grip, or au revoir.
I personally don't care for efforts to take this off Google groups.
Good luck getting people to find you if that's what happens. That's a
fragmentary non-starter, as I've said before.
**--** Steve
Christian Montoya
Your drama episode / temper tantrum is a perfect thread for me to post
the response I received in the Google Groups support forum:
===
There is no mechanism available to group members to assume ownership
status. If there were no co-owners or other managers, you cannot do it
without special intervention of Google Groups Support, an unlikely
event. See this policy:
http://groups.google.com/support/bin/request.py?contact_type=contact_...
Your time might be better spent creating a new parallel group, with
several owners or managers from the start so it can't happen again.
Since the present Group still exists, and is not moderated ( checked),
members can still send Group messages. You could use messages to that
Group to facilitate the transition to a new group. It just takes a
few minutes to create a new group, much longer to get all the members
to join it. While the name cannot be the same, it need differ only by
as little as a character or so, as in this example "Blue_Print_C-S-S."
Try it and see.
===
I will go about setting up a new Google Group, with multiple admins,
in about an hour. If you want to start a countdown to see how long it
takes for me to get blueprintcss.org at the top of Google's rankings,
and effectively convert all of the incoming traffic for Blueprint to
the new mailing list & code hosting site, go ahead. I'm game.
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.net
Rajeev J Sebastian
No one gives a shit about you, or what your plans are.
Please take this as a friendly reality-check-reminder.
Regards
Rajeev J Sebastian
S J
--
Kind Regards,
Sheran Jaddoo
Business Development Manager
Arkis Data Ltd
John Kennedy Street
1st Floor
Harbour Front Building
Port Louis
[ T ]: + 230 208 7233
[ F ]: + 230 291 8448
[ E ]: she...@arkisdata.com
[ E ]: sa...@arkisdata.com
http://www.arkisdata.com
Subsorama
As a new moderator that is no way to go about encouraging users to
follow and contribute to the "blueprint project", do you really want
to lose and discourage *any* users from following blueprint in what is
already a fractional move? -Especially those that have followed,
contributed and helped existing group members in what is already
effectively a very small niche project?
What developments are planned in this move that will interest current
BP users in following the new group? This is a effectively a dead and
failed project, so what new features or goals does this new splinter
group hope to achieve? Why would anyone follow a dead project into new
territory with no new development goals? (If i have missed something
please discard that and fill me in...) The first principle in any
project should surely be that of its goals (and at least a discussion
of them) rather than the projects ownership as is seems to be in this
case....
The comments following your post were frankly distasteful and abusive,
and you should be seen to discourage such behaviour asap afaic,
especially as this gives a tacit glimpse as to what to expect from the
moderation and leadership of your own group. Unfortunately, your
comments can be seen to encourage such childish unprofessionalism. I
hope I am wrong in this matter, and that you show yourself to be above
such simple petty mindedness.
Unless the fundamental concepts for this 'new' project are at least
roughly drafted or discussed prior to the move, I don't see how the
project will avoid exactly the same failed lack of momentum that
blighted the current project. It should be important to ask why this
project failed (is it simply that Olav disappeared, or was it that he
disappeared because he saw that the project failed)? Jeff Croft stated
explicitly in an interview that he was unhappy with the way this
project was being developed - and he developed the original concept!
Should we not be looking at why that might be? There was initially a
wealth momentum and interest from within the industry behind this
project, but it has failed significantly to sustain any ground - why?
Industry figures were on our side and excited at the possibilities
that might arise from this project, and the we lost them - why?
Professional web developers don't *need* a basic set of stylesheets
and basic users don't *want* complicated a ruby/sass diversion -so
just who is this project aimed for?? How can you expect success if
even a long time follower of this group cannot answer such a simple
question!?
Would it not be better to identify the problems that exist within the
project as it stands currently and identify its conceptual flaws and
weaknesses and designate some new goals to work towards, or are you
really going to ignore what the project needs and rush toward
fragmentation and another failure because the problems with the
project were ignored yet again? It would seem timely to stop and look
now before what is left of the community is fragmented and decidedly
split apart.
Finally, I do not think you can simply pin the lack of momentum and
disappearance of industry support on _one_ single issue here and to do
so would a be complete mismanagement of the project and insult to the
original developer Olav, who still despite it all dared to achieve
something significant.
Christian Montoya
This group has been replaced:
http://groups.google.com/group/blueprint-css
Please direct all questions & concerns regarding Blueprint there.
Gary Armstrong
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
-----Original Message-----
From: Subsorama <subs...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:11:01
To: <bluepr...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [BP #2053] Re: I'll be unsubscribing shortly
Chris Eppstein
respond to as they're not directed to me, but I will reply to a few of
the statements quoted below.
First, there's been no decision to move to the Sass version that I'm
working on. Rather I'm doing all my work on a branch and the core team
as well as the community at large will determine whether it gets
merged to the mainline. If the decision is no, I'm going to be content
to maintain the sass version on my own -- my project will be better
off for the effort regardless of the outcome.
Secondly, using sass is an implementation detail to make the Blueprint-
CSS developers life easier. It happens to bring along with it some
really nice benefits that users can choose to leverage and I think
they will find it easier to work with than YAML because it's very
close to something they already understand (css). But if you actually
go look at my branch at http://github.com/chriseppstein/blueprint-css/tree/sass
you will see that it provides css files that are 100% compatible out-
of-the-box with the version of blueprint-css that did not use Sass.
> Professional web developers don't *need* a basic set of stylesheets
> and basic users don't *want* complicated a ruby/sass diversion -so
> just who is this project aimed for??
claims, but if you hold tight and follow along (again you asked for a
reason to move to the new group) I think you'll find them to be true.
But I claim that we can provide basic users with a very easy to use
set of styles that make building their websites much easier AND give
tools to professional web developers that don't want a basic set of
stylesheets. The sass stylesheets define a common language and set of
tools which can be used for both purposes. Again, I don't ask you to
believe me yet, but rather to have patience enough to follow and
critique my work and, in time, help us achieve this goal.
Lastly, I think your assertion that Sass is complicated is false.
EVERY person I know that understands CSS that I've showed Sass to
picked it up in a matter of minutes and immediately saw the benefits
it provided them. The only thing that is more complicated will be the
install, and there are technical solutions to that problem.
> Industry figures were on our side and excited at the possibilities
> that might arise from this project, and the we lost them - why?
direction of Sass: I loved how easy it was to get get a site up and
looking great. But in time, I found my blueprint-based site to be hard
to maintain because the content/presentation barrier was violated by
classes like "span-4". With Sass, Blueprint moves from being a
"collection of stylesheets" and best practices to becoming an actual
framework that allows you to easily define styles for your semantic
content. Frameworks bring power and simplicity by elevating the level
of abstraction and BLUEPRINT WITH SASS IS GOING TO MAKE YOUR LIFE
EASIER.
And with that, I strongly encourage everyone to move to the new
mailing list.
Thanks,
Chris
Subsorama
>> Professional web developers don't *need* a basic set of stylesheets
>> and basic users don't *want* complicated a ruby/sass diversion -so
>> just who is this project aimed for??
>
> Forgive the lack of documentation and examples supporting my next
> claims, but if you hold tight and follow along (again you asked for a
> reason to move to the new group) I think you'll find them to be true.
> But I claim that we can provide basic users with a very easy to use
> set of styles that make building their websites much easier AND give
> tools to professional web developers that don't want a basic set of
> stylesheets. The sass stylesheets define a common language and set of
> tools which can be used for both purposes. Again, I don't ask you to
> believe me yet, but rather to have patience enough to follow and
> critique my work and, in time, help us achieve this goal.
>
> Lastly, I think your assertion that Sass is complicated is false.
> EVERY person I know that understands CSS that I've showed Sass to
> picked it up in a matter of minutes and immediately saw the benefits
> it provided them. The only thing that is more complicated will be the
> install, and there are technical solutions to that problem.
I guess my point would be that you assume the majority of users have a
decent familiarity with css and how it works, the ability to learn and
differentiate sass from css, the willingness to put the time in to
learn BP as a framework above and beyond sass and css itself, and a
friendly support group in which to ask basic questions (which seems to
debatable). Presenting all this to a new user is a very high
requirement of a number of factors and I think a lot of the past
comments to this group would prove that these assumptions aren't quite
as accurate as you might hope.
That said, I think if BP is going to go down the ruby path, sass does
indeed make much more sense than the yaml method; but it is still far
from an inclusive set of requirements even for a broad range of
"experienced" developers or a project managers. I could not for
instance confidently use BP for *any* size project with a more than a
specific developer in mind as others might not know sass/bp and
whatever the benefits there might be break down entirely... This I
would have thought is true for the vast majority of agencies- and I
say this as having a number of fairly large ror projects with sass...
BP doesn't seem to me to help in either usercase, too difficult for
real newbies, to simplistic and limited for real web devs. It seems
stuck specialising in neither area and losing interest from both
sides... Even for the small niche that it is in, I don't see what it
offers beyond the common web developers bag of tricks - and it is
still very limited in its application.
>
>> Industry figures were on our side and excited at the possibilities
>> that might arise from this project, and the we lost them - why?
>
> I can tell you why I lost them, and what compelled me to move in the
> direction of Sass: I loved how easy it was to get get a site up and
> looking great. But in time, I found my blueprint-based site to be hard
> to maintain because the content/presentation barrier was violated by
> classes like "span-4". With Sass, Blueprint moves from being a
> "collection of stylesheets" and best practices to becoming an actual
> framework that allows you to easily define styles for your semantic
> content. Frameworks bring power and simplicity by elevating the level
> of abstraction and BLUEPRINT WITH SASS IS GOING TO MAKE YOUR LIFE
> EASIER.
I think a wider point to consider is that once an experience web dev
has their own collection of best practises, how much more beneficial
is BP to them or their team, what does it give in addition that is
worth the overhead of maintaining a connection to BP? The semantic
issue isn't a problem if you weren't using BP anyway, so that isn't a
real benefit.
I've just had a very quick look at your branch and whilst I can say I
with confidence newbies are just going to get lost in there - I don't
see anything that has been done to improve vertical rhythm within sass
or BP itself. Do you think this can be solved within the framework, or
do you think that people are still going to have to work the rhythms
out and set it for themselves, and if so how is BP or sass helping
them, given that this is the very basis of every visual design?
Genuine question, answer could be that it can be solved arithmetically
- but then again it might not ;)
Rajeev J Sebastian
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 2:14 AM, Subsorama <subs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That said, I think if BP is going to go down the ruby path, sass does
> indeed make much more sense than the yaml method;
I think you have a misunderstanding. I agree with Chris Epstein, etc
that sass should be used to develop blueprint. But, I do think that
blueprint will be available as css files generated from the sass
"source".
Consider for e.g., a similiar case in the mootools js library: hardly
anyone uses the source code as such; instead they use the result of
the build process which produces a single .js file from the 10-20 js
files that constitute mootools.
In the case of blueprint-sass, people are free to use the sass
"source" ... and the rest may use the generated css files (which are
built from those sass files by the blueprint developers and put up for
download just like blueprint is distributed today). So someone who
knows blueprint css as it is today, would continue to use that
knowledge for future releases of blueprint css.
Personally, i have no interest in a "ruby" path for BP because i do
not use ruby (I use django for all my web work). Sass works out
because its syntactic sugar for css and easily implementable in any
language.
Regards
Rajeev J Sebastian
Christian Montoya
Why does this discussion continue on a dead mailing list? You will not
get any responses from the core team unless you use the correct list:
http://groups.google.com/group/blueprint-css
If you have any questions about where the project is going, please
start a discussion there.
S J
it never ends..
i've just landed into a new episode of the hills
Christian Montoya
> fighting and fighting...
> it never ends..
>
> i've just landed into a new episode of the hills
Here's a hint: unsubscribe from this list. It's dead. If this
discussion had happened on the new list, I would have deleted it
already.