Please, lets not start this again. Be happy with what you have, and dream of TM2 at night, but for the love of god, stop complaining in the mean time.
I think it's fair enough to ask. TextMate 2 has been talked about for what, 1.5 -2 years now? There's rarely an update as to the progress either, which is what I think is the main reason people ask "so where's TextMate 2.0 at?" It's a closed-source commercial product (which, for the record, is okee dokee by me) so, in my opinion, there is more responsibility in communicating with your customers. Nobody can just hop in and adopt the open-source "don't like it, then fix it" approach. Why are people so defensive about talking about it? Perhaps I missed a TextMate 2.0 mega-flame battle prior to subscribing to this list.
Clearly TextMate is great. Clearly TextMate is an impressive version 1.x generation product. However, if you really think that TextMate is so complete then I question if you have used any other text editor or IDE or if you are just a fanboy. Basic features like split panes windows and a decent undo system are missing. Because those features are so basic it means their absence is felt nearly every time I use TextMate. I won't get into what features from what editors are missing/ would be nice but I list those two only to underscore the point that TextMate, while great, still has, at the very least, some basic functionality missing. Basic functionality that will, we assume, be addressed with TextMate 2.0. There isn't a day the goes by that I don't lament the lack of a split pane window. Please note that this does not imply I don't think TextMate doesn't have many great things about it that other editors are missing. TextMate rocks.
Therefore, after a long, silent wait since its announcement and the fact that there are still some glaring holes with the current release I think it's fair to ask, "so where's 2.0 at?" It's not a complaint, it's just a question and a reasonable one at that.
I also have held off regarding TM2, but I second Christopher's statement.
It seems to me that it wouldn't be such a negative thing to begin some buzz regarding the app. If TM2 development is still in such an early state that any kind of buzz is not a good thing, than I question why is it taking so long? 1.5-2 yrs is quite a long time.
These are just questions.... not complaints. TM1 gets the job done for now, but a new version would be welcomed with open arms.
On Aug 6, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Christopher Boerger wrote:
Please, lets not start this again. Be happy with what you have, and dream of TM2 at night, but for the love of god, stop complaining in the mean time.
I think it's fair enough to ask. TextMate 2 has been talked about for what, 1.5 -2 years now? There's rarely an update as to the progress either, which is what I think is the main reason people ask "so where's TextMate 2.0 at?" It's a closed-source commercial product (which, for the record, is okee dokee by me) so, in my opinion, there is more responsibility in communicating with your customers. Nobody can just hop in and adopt the open-source "don't like it, then fix it" approach. Why are people so defensive about talking about it? Perhaps I missed a TextMate 2.0 mega-flame battle prior to subscribing to this list.
Clearly TextMate is great. Clearly TextMate is an impressive version 1.x generation product. However, if you really think that TextMate is so complete then I question if you have used any other text editor or IDE or if you are just a fanboy. Basic features like split panes windows and a decent undo system are missing. Because those features are so basic it means their absence is felt nearly every time I use TextMate. I won't get into what features from what editors are missing/ would be nice but I list those two only to underscore the point that TextMate, while great, still has, at the very least, some basic functionality missing. Basic functionality that will, we assume, be addressed with TextMate 2.0. There isn't a day the goes by that I don't lament the lack of a split pane window. Please note that this does not imply I don't think TextMate doesn't have many great things about it that other editors are missing. TextMate rocks.
Therefore, after a long, silent wait since its announcement and the fact that there are still some glaring holes with the current release I think it's fair to ask, "so where's 2.0 at?" It's not a complaint, it's just a question and a reasonable one at that.
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
IMHO announcing TM2 to be free upgrade for current users was wrong decision that could discourage the author from working on development. Personally I'd love to pay for TM2 if some of the discussed features/ fixes we available to me, including:
* soft-wrap indention (even simplest one, this is my biggest desire) * better undo system * leaving ATSUI in favor of CoreText * project file-list context menu (i.e. ⌃⇧A) working also when there's no file open
Even those not really qualify for raising major version number. But then anybody can tell me how we can I encourage the author other than paying for his work? I opt for TM2 should be paid upgrade then :>
Regards,
I agree with the last several statements. A sneak peak would have tremendous value for those of us that have been waiting.
I know some people have held off on bundle development since they figured they should wait for TM2 instead. We're all working in software development, and know the difficulty of gauging exact timelines (etc), but some kind of update every now and again would be encouraging. Transparency is always a nice thing for users.
I was happy to see that TM2 would be a free upgrade, but I'm with Adam if this has held up, or at least discouraged in any way, the development of TM2 (which we've seen no indication that this has been the case but still..).
Clark Endrizzi
On Aug 6, 2008, at 3:48 PM, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
IMHO announcing TM2 to be free upgrade for current users was wrong decision that could discourage the author from working on development. Personally I'd love to pay for TM2 if some of the discussed features/ fixes we available to me, including:
+1.
I bought TextMate June 22, 2005, more than 3 years ago. It is *the* Application that is always running on my Mac. I work with it every day. It payed itself several times over.
The "free upgrade" is not something that I would put on TM1 features list. If TM2 is worth the money of the upgrade (after two years I'm expecting it should be), I would pay up gladly.
Managing expectations would be great. Or tease us with screencasts. :)
Best regards,
I totally agree!
At this point it would be better to just say "oops, we decided to skip TM2 and release TM3, which is NOT free". I would totally pay for TM2 if I had to, it's awesome. And not charging for it is just leaving money on the table.
Even if it was simply a $0.99 upgrade fee, Allan could pay for a new car or Fjord or whatever they have over there.
But we've talked about that before over IRC.
—Thomas Aylott / subtleGradient
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
I would pay up gladly
I would pay for an upgrade as well, if it would set a fire under Allan's butt to get a new release out sooner. :)
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Thomas Aylott wrote:
I totally agree!
At this point it would be better to just say "oops, we decided to skip TM2 and release TM3, which is NOT free". I would totally pay for TM2 if I had to, it's awesome. And not charging for it is just leaving money on the table.
Even if it was simply a $0.99 upgrade fee, Allan could pay for a new car or Fjord or whatever they have over there.
But we've talked about that before over IRC.
—Thomas Aylott / subtleGradient
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
I would pay up gladly
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
I'd put in my vote for paying for an upgrade to TM2 (heck, PRE-TM2, I'd drop an $20 into a programming incentive pool if it would spur quicker development)
Heck I switched over to Leopard on my main machine specifically because I remember reading that TM2 was not going to support Tiger. TM is my text lifeblood (I use it every hour, and I'm not a programmer) I could not bear the thought of running without it.
---- Brian H binarynomad@gmail.com http://www.binarynomad.com
On Aug 6, 2008, at 1:42 PM, Michael Gregoire wrote:
I would pay for an upgrade as well, if it would set a fire under Allan's butt to get a new release out sooner. :)
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Thomas Aylott wrote:
I totally agree!
At this point it would be better to just say "oops, we decided to skip TM2 and release TM3, which is NOT free". I would totally pay for TM2 if I had to, it's awesome. And not charging for it is just leaving money on the table.
Even if it was simply a $0.99 upgrade fee, Allan could pay for a new car or Fjord or whatever they have over there.
But we've talked about that before over IRC.
—Thomas Aylott / subtleGradient
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
I would pay up gladly
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
at the risk of annoying allan, i'll say too that i'd gladly pay for an upgrade. i know he wouldnt charge it but id pay $100 if he asked for it. I use textmate more than apps that have cost me way more than that (CS3 suite im looking at you). heck id give him $50 just to spend a few more hours on tm2 lol.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Brian H binarynomad@gmail.com wrote:
I'd put in my vote for paying for an upgrade to TM2 (heck, PRE-TM2, I'd drop an $20 into a programming incentive pool if it would spur quicker development)
Heck I switched over to Leopard on my main machine specifically because I remember reading that TM2 was not going to support Tiger. TM is my text lifeblood (I use it every hour, and I'm not a programmer) I could not bear the thought of running without it.
Brian H binarynomad@gmail.com http://www.binarynomad.com
On Aug 6, 2008, at 1:42 PM, Michael Gregoire wrote:
I would pay for an upgrade as well, if it would set a fire under Allan's butt to get a new release out sooner. :)
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Thomas Aylott wrote:
I totally agree!
At this point it would be better to just say "oops, we decided to skip TM2 and release TM3, which is NOT free". I would totally pay for TM2 if I had to, it's awesome. And not charging for it is just leaving money on the table.
Even if it was simply a $0.99 upgrade fee, Allan could pay for a new car or Fjord or whatever they have over there.
But we've talked about that before over IRC.
—Thomas Aylott / subtleGradient
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
I would pay up gladly
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
Folks,
I would also pay for TM2 upgrade. There are some aggravating features, or lack thereof, that keeps me from using TM1 on a regular basis.
But yes, I'd be willing to support Allan here.
JP
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Thomas Aylott wrote:
I totally agree!
At this point it would be better to just say "oops, we decided to skip TM2 and release TM3, which is NOT free". I would totally pay for TM2 if I had to, it's awesome. And not charging for it is just leaving money on the table.
Even if it was simply a $0.99 upgrade fee, Allan could pay for a new car or Fjord or whatever they have over there.
But we've talked about that before over IRC.
—Thomas Aylott / subtleGradient
On Aug 6, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
I would pay up gladly
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
On Aug 6, 2008, at 3:48 PM, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
IMHO announcing TM2 to be free upgrade for current users was wrong decision that could discourage the author from working on development. Personally I'd love to pay for TM2 if some of the discussed features/fixes we available to me, including:
I too would gladly pay for the next version, however I would do so whatever features it includes and whenever it becomes available. This is because I am a user who is 98% satisfied with TM as it is now, and for whom not having continued support would be *much* worse than not having new features. Keep in mind, money may not be the issue here. Allan may have good reasons for taking a long time with the development of TM2, such as technical issues that are simply taking a long time to resolve, design options that he needs time to live with before making a choice, etc. Finally, it's even possible that he is taking an intentional break from TM development; if this is true, the last thing we want to do is reduce the chance that he decides to come back to it. (Disclaimer: I do not know Allan, so these are merely guesses and may be completely off the mark.)
I can certainly sympathize with users who have been waiting for specific, critical features, and want to have some idea of when these might become available. However, it's equally bad (if not worse) to be promised an upgrade containing specific features and then have those features dropped or have the upgrade arrive much later than promised (can anyone say Vista?).
In sum, I'm not trying to start an argument nor am I dismissing some of the points that have been made so far. I'm simply reporting my own position which is (1) I *would* pay for an upgrade, and (2) I will continue to use TM regardless of when the upgrade becomes available.
-- Phil
I would also gladly pay for a new version with a working undo feature and the ability to split the view. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything else that I really feel I'm lacking, but I feel the lack of those two things on a daily basis.
And, without meaning to start any kind of 'editor war', I do note that the MacVim team have now managed to create a version of vim that doesn't look so out of place on a mac, and I'm sure the same is true of the various emacs ports. And all of the rest of the competition.
Textmate's competition is not standing still. Which is not to say that there should be a version for the sake of it - far from it. But...but...it is hard not to be impatient for those improvements which would make a big difference to daily use.
I don't think I saw someone mention it in here (sorry for repeating if they did!), but I just checked the FAQ because i vaguely recalled Allan saying something on the faq about not asking about TM2, and sure enough:
Q: Are there any news?
No.
(- August 04, 2008).
:P
It's kind of funny to me that my two favorite programs by far (textmate and quicksilver) have a completely unknown development schedule (although quicksilver's is now dead :[ ). oh well! Theyre both kind of like os x - you can't complain very legitimately about their faults because they're just so much better than the alternatives. On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Nicholas Cole nicholas.cole@gmail.comwrote:
I would also gladly pay for a new version with a working undo feature and the ability to split the view. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything else that I really feel I'm lacking, but I feel the lack of those two things on a daily basis.
And, without meaning to start any kind of 'editor war', I do note that the MacVim team have now managed to create a version of vim that doesn't look so out of place on a mac, and I'm sure the same is true of the various emacs ports. And all of the rest of the competition.
Textmate's competition is not standing still. Which is not to say that there should be a version for the sake of it - far from it. But...but...it is hard not to be impatient for those improvements which would make a big difference to daily use.
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
On Aug 6, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Nick wrote:
It's kind of funny to me that my two favorite programs by far (textmate and quicksilver) have a completely unknown development schedule (although quicksilver's is now dead :[ ). oh well! Theyre both kind of like os x - you can't complain very legitimately about their faults because they're just so much better than the alternatives.
Sure you can. Mac OS X users traditionally complain loudly about faults and grievances they find with OS X. You'll rarely find a more critical bunch than aggrieved Mac users. That a piece of software is good does not make it impervious to criticism.
Someone else brought up MacVim, and it's an interesting point. For a long time, I used Textmate exclusively. But now, I only use Textmate around 50% of the time -- the other half taken up by MacVim, when I need split panes, remote editing, or an editor that will not choke on large text files.
--- David Zhou david@nodnod.net
didn't say you couldn't complain, just said you can't complain much for good reason ;)
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 9:19 PM, David Zhou david@nodnod.net wrote:
On Aug 6, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Nick wrote:
It's kind of funny to me that my two favorite programs by far (textmate and quicksilver) have a completely unknown development schedule (although quicksilver's is now dead :[ ). oh well! Theyre both kind of like os x - you can't complain very legitimately about their faults because they're just so much better than the alternatives.
Sure you can. Mac OS X users traditionally complain loudly about faults and grievances they find with OS X. You'll rarely find a more critical bunch than aggrieved Mac users. That a piece of software is good does not make it impervious to criticism.
Someone else brought up MacVim, and it's an interesting point. For a long time, I used Textmate exclusively. But now, I only use Textmate around 50% of the time -- the other half taken up by MacVim, when I need split panes, remote editing, or an editor that will not choke on large text files.
David Zhou david@nodnod.net
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
Well said. A lot of people complain about apple not realeasing OS X out to a general X86 platform. But people don't stop and think that a good portion of OS X's stability comes from the fact that it is written with only specific hardware in mind. If it was put out for you to load on your of you would see stabity isues arise. And the driver support would be a nightmare for the first couple of years. Oh yes, and since apple would not be selling hardware. The price of OS X would jump from 129.00 to at least 300.00 if not more. So when Steve Jobs gets up and makes fun of all the different costs of the Vista packages and said that os x is only 129.00 in comparison keep in mind MS is not selling hardware. And which version of windows is the most stable and crashes least? Not the server os. But the varient of windows that runs on both xbox platforms. Why? Because tv os is coded to specific unchanging HW. But yes macs are better then the alternatives. But there is trade off, propritary hardware. It a ballancing act. Make your choice. Linux? If you make a system with the right hardware yeah it's solid. But you have to keep a close eye on the HCL and hope you pick the right ones for the flavor of Linux you choose. Ubunto is a fair exception, but this is mostly do to the community support and the fact that the developer sank 50 million of his own cash into the project. TM is still a better choice. Unless you get one of the eclipse based IDE or editors because of it's community help.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2008, at 9:19 PM, David Zhou david@nodnod.net wrote:
On Aug 6, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Nick wrote:
It's kind of funny to me that my two favorite programs by far (textmate and quicksilver) have a completely unknown development schedule (although quicksilver's is now dead :[ ). oh well! Theyre both kind of like os x - you can't complain very legitimately about their faults because they're just so much better than the alternatives.
Sure you can. Mac OS X users traditionally complain loudly about faults and grievances they find with OS X. You'll rarely find a more critical bunch than aggrieved Mac users. That a piece of software is good does not make it impervious to criticism.
Someone else brought up MacVim, and it's an interesting point. For a long time, I used Textmate exclusively. But now, I only use Textmate around 50% of the time -- the other half taken up by MacVim, when I need split panes, remote editing, or an editor that will not choke on large text files.
David Zhou david@nodnod.net
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
I, too, use TextMate on a daily basis. Yes, there are only a few features that are missing (split views is my #1, too).
The issue for me isn't cost, but promises. I know that Allan got quite fed up with all of the questions regarding version 2 and when it was going to be out. I know that he made an announcement that basically said, "Don't ask. Just trust me, I'm working on it." That was enough for me; I can totally understand because I field very similar requests on a daily basis.
But, with the next version of OS X coming up and no Leopard-only TM2 on the horizon, I'm beginning to wonder.
Someone else mentioned managing expectations and I think that is the key. Manage our expectations. If TM2 is still a year away, just tell us. We're not going to stop using our favorite tool. If TM2 is in the works and just around the corner, let us know that, too. I don't think anyone is asking for a beta tomorrow; we'd just like to know that it is still coming. ------------------------------------- Dana Kashubeck Systems Manager Riemer Reporting Service Inc. http://www.riemer.com
Phone: 440-835-2477 x. 125 Fax: 440-835-4594 -------------------------------------
http://lists.macromates.com/textmate/2008-April/025135.html
On 7 Aug 2008, at 12:48, Dana Kashubeck wrote:
I, too, use TextMate on a daily basis. Yes, there are only a few features that are missing (split views is my #1, too).
The issue for me isn't cost, but promises. I know that Allan got quite fed up with all of the questions regarding version 2 and when it was going to be out. I know that he made an announcement that basically said, "Don't ask. Just trust me, I'm working on it." That was enough for me; I can totally understand because I field very similar requests on a daily basis.
But, with the next version of OS X coming up and no Leopard-only TM2 on the horizon, I'm beginning to wonder.
Someone else mentioned managing expectations and I think that is the key. Manage our expectations. If TM2 is still a year away, just tell us. We're not going to stop using our favorite tool. If TM2 is in the works and just around the corner, let us know that, too. I don't think anyone is asking for a beta tomorrow; we'd just like to know that it is still coming.
Dana Kashubeck Systems Manager Riemer Reporting Service Inc. http://www.riemer.com
Phone: 440-835-2477 x. 125 Fax: 440-835-4594
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
On 2008-Aug-6, at 6:52 PM, Phil Schumm wrote:
Allan may have good reasons for taking a long time with the development of TM2, such as technical issues that are simply taking a long time to resolve, design options that he needs time to live with before making a choice, etc.
Don't forget the time it takes to support TextMate via IRC, mailing lists, and direct e-mail. (That's gotta be huge.) I'm willing to wait a bit (or a lot) longer for updates if I can get support for the current version direct from the developer.
And of course we'd all pay for TM2, but we're not exactly a random sample of users. :)
--- Rob McBroom http://www.skurfer.com/
hopefully this won't come off as annoying (sorry if it does) but I can only think of one question we could ask about TM2 that would actually be all around helpful:
Can we help things in any way?
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 4:33 AM, Rob McBroom textmate@skurfer.com wrote:
On 2008-Aug-6, at 6:52 PM, Phil Schumm wrote:
Allan may have good reasons for taking a long time with the development of TM2, such as technical issues that are simply taking a long time to resolve, design options that he needs time to live with before making a choice, etc.
Don't forget the time it takes to support TextMate via IRC, mailing lists, and direct e-mail. (That's gotta be huge.) I'm willing to wait a bit (or a lot) longer for updates if I can get support for the current version direct from the developer.
And of course we'd all pay for TM2, but we're not exactly a random sample of users. :)
Rob McBroom http://www.skurfer.com/
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
How about not moaning constantly and making Allan waste his time and nerves reading and replying to silly threads titled "When is TextMate 2 coming out?"
Sorry guys, couldn't resist.
I think we're all missing the most crucial mistake in this discussion:
The plural of TM is NOT TM2. It is TMS. For some reason, you all keep writing that ``s'' backwards. Keep focused people, we don't want to lose track of what's important.
--Evan "bats, cats, fats, hats, mats, gnats, pats, rats, tats, vats, TMS" Berkowitz
On Aug 7, 2008, at 8:31 PM, Gleb Dolgich wrote:
How about not moaning constantly and making Allan waste his time and nerves reading and replying to silly threads titled "When is TextMate 2 coming out?"
Sorry guys, couldn't resist.
-- Gleb
On 7 Aug 2008, at 23:21, Nick wrote:
hopefully this won't come off as annoying (sorry if it does) but I can only think of one question we could ask about TM2 that would actually be all around helpful:
Can we help things in any way?
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 4:33 AM, Rob McBroom textmate@skurfer.com wrote: On 2008-Aug-6, at 6:52 PM, Phil Schumm wrote:
Allan may have good reasons for taking a long time with the development of TM2, such as technical issues that are simply taking a long time to resolve, design options that he needs time to live with before making a choice, etc.
Don't forget the time it takes to support TextMate via IRC, mailing lists, and direct e-mail. (That's gotta be huge.) I'm willing to wait a bit (or a lot) longer for updates if I can get support for the current version direct from the developer.
And of course we'd all pay for TM2, but we're not exactly a random sample of users. :)
Rob McBroom http://www.skurfer.com/
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
On 8 Aug 2008, at 01:31, Gleb Dolgich wrote:
How about not moaning constantly and making Allan waste his time and nerves reading and replying to silly threads titled "When is TextMate 2 coming out?"
Sorry guys, couldn't resist.
-- Gleb
People do have a right to ask what is going on with a product that has been announced. It would be different if people were always bugging him to request him to write a new version. They're not. They're asking for more information on a product they love, where an announcement has been made that a new version is in development. The fact that the thread comes up again and again is a sign that there is an active and passionate community around this software that is constantly being renewed. This is very positive in my mind, and I would imagine a lot of developers would be very envious of the involvement and passion that TextMate inspires in its users.
I think the tone of this thread has been overwhelmingly helpful and positive, but as a number of people have said, with no real info coming out about the update people may start to look elsewhere. TextMate 2 might be a month away or it could be two years away - that's fine, it's Allan's project and he can take as long as he likes to do it how he wants. However, I don't think people asking (politely, constructively and helpfully) how progress is coming along is either a waste of his time or his nerves to be fair.
Nigel
Tung is bloody from byting it...
Fact is that for the last 3 years I have been waiting for some things that bug me EVERY DAY to get improved (*1), none of which would require major work like split panes (which personally I never saw any use for, but I know others do).
For the last **2 years** TextMate has not seen any major enhancements other than bug fixes because all effort supposedly goes into a mystical TM2.
Other IDEs have been catching up. For Objective-C projects TM is rapidly loosing it's edge over xCode, similar things are probably true for Java and some other languages.
Damn right I am getting impatient!
Gerd
*1: - Non-word characters per language instead of global. - Double-click extend selection behavior with respect to non-word characters (should do one at a time). - Double-click on a brace should select to the matching brace (also for [],()). - I wish I could reverse click and alt-click when clicking on a fold marker, I rarely have use for just unfolding the next line or so because another block follows. Typically I am just interested in folding/unfolding whole methods/functions.
Christopher Boerger wrote:
Why are people so defensive about talking about it? Perhaps I missed a TextMate 2.0 mega-flame battle prior to subscribing to this list.
It's more that the question gets asked every week, and every week the answer is the same :)
Basic features like split panes windows and a decent undo system are missing. Because those features are so basic it means their absence is felt nearly every time I use TextMate.
Of course, everyone has a different idea of which features are “basic”. ;)
-Jacob
I would be interested to know if there is a financial constraint to the development. I would be more than happy to pay for my copy ahead of time to put some money into a front-end development pot for Allan. Marillion did a similar thing by asking fans to pay for a new album to help cover the costs of recording and production which they couldn't cover up front. I'd hate to think that development time was proving hard to come by because a promise has been made for a free upgrade that is proving hard to deliver.
However, I imagine there is only a very small core of users contributing here who would be as willing to do this. Managing the roll-out of a paid upgrade after promising a free one could be, in the words of Peep Show's Mark Corrigan, 'an administrative shit-storm'.
Nigel
On 7 Aug 2008, at 08:15, Jacob Rus wrote:
Christopher Boerger wrote:
Why are people so defensive about talking about it? Perhaps I missed a TextMate 2.0 mega-flame battle prior to subscribing to this list.
It's more that the question gets asked every week, and every week the answer is the same :)
Basic features like split panes windows and a decent undo system are missing. Because those features are so basic it means their absence is felt nearly every time I use TextMate.
Of course, everyone has a different idea of which features are “basic”. ;)
-Jacob
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
There is no financial constraint, nor is it “lack of competition” that dictates the speed of development.
It did take years to reach the present 1.5 version, and that was with me spending all my time on the project, working far more than what is probably healthy.
On 7 Aug 2008, at 10:37, Nigel Green wrote:
I would be interested to know if there is a financial constraint to the development. I would be more than happy to pay for my copy ahead of time to put some money into a front-end development pot for Allan. Marillion did a similar thing by asking fans to pay for a new album to help cover the costs of recording and production which they couldn't cover up front. I'd hate to think that development time was proving hard to come by because a promise has been made for a free upgrade that is proving hard to deliver.
However, I imagine there is only a very small core of users contributing here who would be as willing to do this. Managing the roll-out of a paid upgrade after promising a free one could be, in the words of Peep Show's Mark Corrigan, 'an administrative shit-storm'.
Nigel
On 7 Aug 2008, at 08:15, Jacob Rus wrote:
Christopher Boerger wrote:
Why are people so defensive about talking about it? Perhaps I missed a TextMate 2.0 mega-flame battle prior to subscribing to this list.
It's more that the question gets asked every week, and every week the answer is the same :)
Basic features like split panes windows and a decent undo system are missing. Because those features are so basic it means their absence is felt nearly every time I use TextMate.
Of course, everyone has a different idea of which features are “basic”. ;)
-Jacob
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
Health is far more important than money of course. But, with the huge userbase of TM, people willing to pay for an upgrade to TM2 or at least some added features (I've some too), would it be an idea for you to hire someone else to ease the workload a bit? I know from experience it's very difficult to get someone else involved. After all, it's your program, you've invensted so much time in it. It's almost your child. But children grow up, become teenager and eventually even adults. This is the line software generally follows as well. What's the moment to distantiate a bit from that child / software? Well, if health issues start to influence the health of the product, it's becoming time to find solutions to keep the software ahead of the competition.
One way is to get other programmers to do work for you. You probably have skilled friends who can be of service here. I'd guess you'll find enough people here willing to pay in advance.
Anyway, stopping the development because of health issues is understandable from a personal point of view and should be respected IMO. But it does interfere with the TM software development itself and it does interfere with everyone using TM every day, like me. If one day another editor does fulfill my wishes better than TM I'd hesistate not a moment and just move over to the other program - my work also has to continue and if I can do it a bit quicker, it's probably worth the investmen. I don't mind if the costs are $10 or $100.
-
Adam Strzelecki -
Alex Ross -
Allan Odgaard -
Brad Hutchins -
Brian H -
Christopher Boerger -
Clark Endrizzi -
Dana Kashubeck -
David Zhou -
Evan Berkowitz -
Gerd Knops -
Gleb Dolgich -
Jacob Rus -
Jim Perry -
Michael Gregoire -
Nicholas Cole -
Nick -
Nigel Green -
Pedro Melo -
Phil Schumm -
R e m b e r t O l d e n b o o m -
Rob McBroom -
Thomas Aylott