> --- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Derik Whittaker" <graudowd@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ok,
> >
> > In order to try to stop the viral spread of the 'Scott' bashing from
> > jumping lists, I have deleted the original 'Funny' posting.
> >
> > Why did I do this?  Was it because I want to be 'Dictator Derik'?  No.
> >  Because I had asked the group to try to keep the posts here civil
> > (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/altdotnet/message/43).  And this
> > post was not done with good intent, instead it was done to be
> > spiteful.
>
> How was it spiteful?  I was reporting on an actual fact, that Scott had
> sent me email, because he was mad that I made an Alvin and the
> Chipmunks reference, and was notifying me he would ban me from the list
> if I persisted in that type of behavior (which leads to obvious
> questions of what fits the category I need to avoid...Josie and the
> Pussycats?  Rocky and Bullwinkle?  Starsky and Hutch?...But I digress).
>
> I was also honest in reporting that I thought this was hilarious.
>
> Private email to me is split 50-50 (and pretty vocally I might add) on
> whether they also agree that it was funny.
>
> But, I'll try to play nicer here (though I will add, you can always
> ignore threads that bore you).

	 One thing you could have done was to post the email on the OTHER list
for everyone to see. That would keep the topic where it belonged. This is a
different list. Most of us have read what Scott and others have said on the
other list, everyone can draw their own conclusions from that, however it's on
THAT list, so let's keep it there, so we can keep this list clean. :)

		 FB

After all, it would be natural to have an altdotjava list if the need
existed, and their discussion would mostly be more relevant to the java
world, which on certain aspects (containers et al) is quite a bit more
advanced than .net etc.

--
SerialSeb
http://serialseb.blogspot.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: altdotnet@yahoogroups.com [mailto:altdotnet@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Derik Whittaker
> Sent: 31 December 2007 19:19
> To: altdotnet@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [altdotnet] Re: And another spanner ... is alt.net an
> appropriate name?
>
> I agree with Jeremy,
>
> We all may use 'non' MS tools, we are still developing for and on the
> MS platform.  So for me, the .net needs to stay.
>
> --- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy D. Miller"
> <jeremydmiller@...> wrote:
> >
> > Casey,
> >
> > This very subject came up a bit at the mini summit in NYC.  I think
> we want to keep ".Net" in the name somehow because this is very
> specifically about strengthening the .Net community.  Most of the
> topics we're interested aren't specific to .Net at all, but getting
> those topics a greater play in the .Net community is a specific goal.
>  We are a .Net group and we should keep it focused that way.  Which
> isn't to say that you can't be a part of any other community as well.
>  Besides, the Java, Ruby, XP, and Scrum communities are doing just
> fine anyway.
> >
> > I think the general consensus on the name "ALT.NET" is something
> like it's the worst name except for all of the others.  The "alt"
> doesn't do much for me either, but the ".Net" needs to stay.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Casey Charlton <casey@...>
> > To: altdotnet@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 1:02:49 PM
> > Subject: [altdotnet] And another spanner ... is alt.net an
> appropriate name?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >             I'm not sure alt.net is a great name ...
> >
> >
> >
> > I as a developer am not tied to MS, though I am very likely to be in
> that world.
> >
> >
> >
> > Even when I am in the MS world, I use a dozen or more
> >
> > tools/technologies that aren't MS or .NET based ...
> >
> >
> >
> > Surely the bit of the title that was wrong on the other list was the
> >
> > .NET bit ... not the alt bit ... ?
> >
> >
> >
> > alt.dev would be a better name perhaps :)
> >
> >
> >
> > Discuss :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <!--
> >
> > #ygrp-mkp{
> > border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px
> 0px;padding:0px 14px;}
> > #ygrp-mkp hr{
> > border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
> > #ygrp-mkp #hd{
> >
> color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-
> height:122%;margin:10px
> 0px;}
> > #ygrp-mkp #ads{
> > margin-bottom:10px;}
> > #ygrp-mkp .ad{
> > padding:0 0;}
> > #ygrp-mkp .ad a{
> > color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
> > -->
> >
> >
> >
> > <!--
> >
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
> > font-family:Arial;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
> > margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
> > margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
> > -->
> >
> >
> >
> > <!--
> >
> > #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean,
> sans-serif;}
> > #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
> > #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica,
> clean, sans-serif;}
> > #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
> > #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
> > #ygrp-text{
> > font-family:Georgia;
> > }
> > #ygrp-text p{
> > margin:0 0 1em 0;}
> > #ygrp-tpmsgs{
> > font-family:Arial;
> > clear:both;}
> > #ygrp-vitnav{
> > padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
> > #ygrp-vitnav a{
> > padding:0 1px;}
> > #ygrp-actbar{
> > clear:both;margin:25px
> 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
> > #ygrp-actbar .left{
> > float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
> > .bld{font-weight:bold;}
> > #ygrp-grft{
> > font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
> > #ygrp-ft{
> > font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
> > padding:5px 0;
> > }
> > #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
> > padding-bottom:10px;}
> >
> > #ygrp-vital{
> > background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
> > #ygrp-vital #vithd{
> >
> font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-
> transform:uppercase;}
> > #ygrp-vital ul{
> > padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
> > #ygrp-vital ul li{
> > list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
> > }
> > #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
> >
> font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-
> align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
> > #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
> > font-weight:bold;}
> > #ygrp-vital a{
> > text-decoration:none;}
> >
> > #ygrp-vital a:hover{
> > text-decoration:underline;}
> >
> > #ygrp-sponsor #hd{
> > color:#999;font-size:77%;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ov{
> > padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
> > padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
> > list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
> > text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor #nc{
> > background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad{
> > padding:8px 0;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
> >
> font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-
> height:122%;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
> > text-decoration:none;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
> > text-decoration:underline;}
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
> > margin:0;}
> > o{font-size:0;}
> > .MsoNormal{
> > margin:0 0 0 0;}
> > #ygrp-text tt{
> > font-size:120%;}
> > blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
> > .replbq{margin:4;}
> > -->
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

1. One option is to look at using Script#. This allows you to write C#
debuggable code that is compiled to JavaScript.
2. Another option is the new volta project which translates IL to C#.
3. JSUnit

On 12/31/07, jdn3times <jdn3times@...> wrote:
> Is there a toolkit or framework out there than can help with this?  I'm
> getting bitten pretty hard by having to 'debug' some javascript by
> simply navigating to the page and seeing what happens (note in advance,
> I can't use Visual Studio 2008 and some of its advanced features in
> this area).
>
> TIA,
> jdn
>
>

Yeah, it's a catch-22 with some dev teams.  If they do the planning,
research, and analysis with due diligence (not "properly" because
there's no "right" way to do it and not have changes to made after
the fact) then they're more likely to have make the correct decision
and not need to swap out something an ORM.  But, if you don't do the
planning, research, and analysis with due diligence then it's more
likely you will...  If you've got a DAL or you're using the
repository pattern you should have effectively abstracted much of
the details of the ORM from the domain layer--but that's as far as
I'd got to supporting swapping an ORM out.

--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Rayner, John" <john.rayner@...>
wrote:
>
> I totally agree with Frans.  In fact, I can't really see a
particularly
> good reason to try and build a system so that the ORM can be
swapped
> with something else.  The only reason I've ever heard given is
along the
> lines of "but if we later find that xxx is no good then we will
need to
> replace it".  You can mitigate this risk is a number of ways - do
some
> investigation up front, follow accepted "normal" use of an ORM.
And
> there is also an unspoken second part to this statement - "... and
we
> won't want to have to change any code when we replace the ORM".
The
> point Ayende made is that this is not really possible.
>
>
>
> The example I gave was an internal learning exercise on a very
simple
> system and was never intended for production.  We put it together
on one
> of our company days so that everyone could get a feel for the
various
> ORM options and what they are good for.

Crap, I guess I put TDD in twice, the other should have been DDD.

Someone's changed it so any votes that were done previous are no
lost; so if you feel it's important, please vote again.


--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Colin Jack" <colin.jack@...>
wrote:
>
> TDD is in twice, I think the second one is supposed to be DDD?
>
> --- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, altdotnet@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the
> > altdotnet group:
> >
> > What aspects are important to you when you think about ALT.NET?
> > (yes taken from CLI_Dev)
> >
> >   o Self-improvement
> >   o Not be limited by status quo
> >   o Adopt practices for other development communities
> >   o Use tools that encourage principles and knowledge
> >   o Affect how Microsoft does business
> >   o Open discussion on better ways to produce excellent software
> >   o Agile
> >   o TDD (Test Driven Design)
> >   o TDD (Test Driven Design)
> >   o User Stories
> >   o Pair Programming
> >   o OO Design
> >
> >
> > To vote, please visit the following web page:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/altdotnet/surveys?id=2315958
> >
> > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
> > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo!
Groups
> > web site listed above.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
>

movements that are divisive primarily are rarely the most successful.
imho, it's progressive movements that are successful. this is entirely
subjective, but it better represents the goal to me, as divisiveness
is something i get enough from the news.

On Jan 1, 2008 5:14 PM, David Laribee <david@...> wrote:
> IMHO, lack of divisiveness (in the non-rhetorical bullshit sense) is one of
> our main problems.
>
> movements are divisive.
>
> had we come up with a clearer definition it'd be easier for people to
> evaluate: "is this something for me?" i see this as the biggest failing to
> date, and i was one that argued against the need for more definition. rookie
> mistake; when things get to a certain size/scope that definition is
> critical.
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 1, 2008 5:09 PM, Brad Wilson <dotnetguy@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that you could make a group which is wider scoped to include
> things like Ruby (which I love), but it would lose the focus of the group.
> Then what exactly are you looking for alternatives to? It's just... "dev".
> :)
> >
> > Hanselman suggested Pragmatic .NET, which is not a bad idea, either. Take
> some of the divisiveness out, leave the "using technologies related to .NET"
> in.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 1, 2008 1:52 PM, Jeff Brown < jeff.brown@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok, that's changed a bit since Austin then...
> > >
> > > Well, it's good to have some kind of focus at least.
> > >
> > > Jeff.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> / Dave
>
> http://thebeelog.com

right, all opinions are divisive, but that is reductio ad absurdum. To
be divisive is to be marginal. To be progressive is to be on the side
of progress.

(and manners count here, i don't think there's been anything
disrespectful at all in your contributions to the discourse, and i
really appreciate that because there has certainly been that
disrespect.)

On Jan 1, 2008 5:36 PM, David Laribee <david@...> wrote:
> not sure we're operating on the same definition of divisive; _we are_
> attempting to create disunity. absolutely. otherwise this simply is not a
> movement, it's a polite professional association dedicated to the mission of
> glad handing.
>
> what movement isn't divisive?
>
> what movement doesn't seek to break apart a monolith or create contours in a
> once flat plane?
>
> also, looking back on altnetconf/cli_dev, what about this community wasn't
> divisive from the start? there are hundreds of opinions in the .NET
> developer community. it's was a very divisive community even before Austin
> or my ALT.NET post. what we're doing now is coping with that and
> factionalizing.
>
> i would draw line; divisive doesn't mean disrespectful. while we may
> disagree, doesn't mean i'll refuse to listen to you or employ rhetorical
> tricks. manners count in my book...
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 1, 2008 5:19 PM, Shawn Hinsey <smhinsey@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > movements that are divisive primarily are rarely the most successful.
> > imho, it's progressive movements that are successful. this is entirely
> > subjective, but it better represents the goal to me, as divisiveness
> > is something i get enough from the news.
> >
> >
> > On Jan 1, 2008 5:14 PM, David Laribee <david@...> wrote:
> > > IMHO, lack of divisiveness (in the non-rhetorical bullshit sense) is one
> of
> > > our main problems.
> > >
> > > movements are divisive.
> > >
> > > had we come up with a clearer definition it'd be easier for people to
> > > evaluate: "is this something for me?" i see this as the biggest failing
> to
> > > date, and i was one that argued against the need for more definition.
> rookie
> > > mistake; when things get to a certain size/scope that definition is
> > > critical.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 1, 2008 5:09 PM, Brad Wilson <dotnetguy@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree that you could make a group which is wider scoped to include
> > > things like Ruby (which I love), but it would lose the focus of the
> group.
> > > Then what exactly are you looking for alternatives to? It's just...
> "dev".
> > > :)
> > > >
> > > > Hanselman suggested Pragmatic .NET, which is not a bad idea, either.
> Take
> > > some of the divisiveness out, leave the "using technologies related to
> .NET"
> > > in.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 1, 2008 1:52 PM, Jeff Brown < jeff.brown@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, that's changed a bit since Austin then...
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, it's good to have some kind of focus at least.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > > / Dave
> > >
> > > http://thebeelog.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> / Dave
>
> http://thebeelog.com

• To provide the guidance and direction to passionate .Net developers that they may hone their craft to even greater heights.
• To try to instill passion in the .Net developers that they may create better software.

I agree, "pragmatism" really supports any incorrect way of doing
something, when it works.  "It works doesn't it" is pragmatic...

--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy D. Miller"
<jeremydmiller@...> wrote:
>
> It's the .Net community, and strengthening the .Net community at
large, that I'm worried about here.  Yeah, we should definitely be a
part of other communities as well, but we either have some focus or
we're nothing but a name.  Besides, the Ruby guys are in much, much
better shape in regards to development fundamentals and practices.
It's the .Net world that does need the help.
>
> "Pragmatic" is a bit dangerous too.  The guys doing
DataSet/DataAdapter designs think that they're perfectly pragmatic.
Besides, nothing pisses me off worse than some weasel trying to win
an argument by claiming to be "pragmatic."  "Well, my argument is
pragmatic and your position (that I don't understand) must therefore
not be pragmatic, I win!"
>
> Jeremy D. Miller
> The Shade Tree Developer
> jeremydmiller@...
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Brad Wilson <dotnetguy@...>
> To: altdotnet@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 1, 2008 5:09:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [altdotnet] And another spanner ... is alt.net an
appropriate name?

I admire that there's desire to improve development in the .NET
space.  I'm willing to accept that's the space the majority of the
people who are gathering around these philosophies are in and that
it's reasonably rare that someone works in more than one space.
Long-term, I'm a little leery of that focus.  It reinforces an "us"
and "them" stance and can result in friction in discussion of
practices common outside the .NET community as well as leaves those
of us who do work in more than one space as an outsider.

My problem with "alternative" is that it an outside-only moniker.
It's only "alternative" to those on the outside, regardless of how
they work.  Once you buy into the philosophies and become part of
the discussion you're essentially denigrating yourself and the
philosophies/practices by describing what you do as
being "alternative".  If you're already a proponent of the
philosophies or are already practicing the discussed practices then
it was never "alternative".

--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy D. Miller"
<jeremydmiller@...> wrote:
>
> Jeff,
>
> Read a couple messages in.  The ".net" piece does matter.  There's
already healthy communities around DDD, Agile, XP, Scrum, Java, and
Ruby.  We're definitely about making the Microsoft development
community better.

--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ocampo" <agilejoe@...> wrote:
>
> Here comes little ole me telling everyone, " Well you know I could
show you
> how to do it better next time.  May take you just a bit longer but the
> quality and maintainability will be much higher."  This phrase speaks
to
> some but a majority don't give a

I don't know that it is just that people don't give a damn.  I think it
is also that people need to have a reason to believe you.  Even when
you have passionate developers, you still have to be able to sell the
approach.

This is difficult because developers are like economists.  What's the
phrase, "Put 10 of them in a room, and you'll get 15 opinions."  Even
among these groups here (just to choose a topic at random), if you get
all the people who agree that BDD is good to discuss the topic, there's
a wide divergence of what BDD actually should be.

That's why I think the ASP.NET MVC Framework is more likely to produce
results than ALT.NET.  Assuming the guidance follows Guthrie's
presentations, terms like 'separation of
concerns', 'maintainability', 'testablility', etc. will become more
widely known and widely respected because Microsoft's voice is louder.

Which isn't to say ALT.NET shouldn't exist or not try to be active, or
anything like that.  But in reality, I don't know what ALT.NET can do
for the mainstream unless they start writing MSDN articles or get their
books published (like Ayende and J. Miller) or produce tangible
guidance of some sort.

jdn

Yes, it's unfortunate that pragmatic and Pragmatic are easily
confused.  Not to mention, there needs (I think) to be a clear
separation from the Pragmatic camp--you can be Pragmatic and
ALT.NET....

--- In altdotnet@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy D. Miller"
<jeremydmiller@...> wrote:
>
> There's also the issue of "just trying to be like the Pragmatic
Programmers," which of course, is a very laudable goal.