Log message #549449

# At Username Text
# Feb 25th 2009, 02:27 alkemann there is no component, it just adds a vendor object to the controller.
# Feb 25th 2009, 02:27 alkemann why do so low quality stuff continue to appear on bakery? http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/bake-an-html-screen-scraper-component
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:42 ADmad lets go back to the terminal i say
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:41 alkemann heh. no images or css. text is all that matters
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:40 gwoo images are stupid
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:37 ADmad alkemann: wring gwoo's arm to upgrade chaw maybe :P
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:36 jperras heh, that's up to gwoo. I think he's planning on adding image embedding into the wiki pages
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:35 alkemann so how are we going to get mocks into our wiki? it being a bit image impaired :D
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:32 jperras actually, the only issue with the iniAcl implementation is that the base functionality does not allow for permission globs; everything needs to be spelled out
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:31 jperras what I meant was that gwoo said that spec is close to what was implemented in bakery 1.0
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:30 jperras alkemann: no, what's in the spec is fine
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:30 alkemann ADmad: way i read it, he rather wants to use the old code
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:30 ADmad alkemann: so i guess its we will get to keep it after all :)
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:29 jperras pretty much the same as on that spec, from what gwoo tells me
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:28 alkemann jperras: havent seen any code from 1.0.. what to they do?
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:28 jperras so the custom permission engine from bakery 1.0 seems appropriate
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:27 alkemann i've not done any tests, but reading the book on it did not convince me to use it instead of what is currently specced
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:27 jperras and it's less flexible than I remember
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:27 jperras alkemann: so I did a few tests with iniAcl for the permissions
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:26 _nate_ and the API is super easy
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:26 _nate_ yeah, it's especially great for graphing
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:26 alkemann im gonna get into that real soon
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:25 _nate_ it's all canvas baby
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:25 _nate_ yup
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:23 alkemann very cool thing i didnt see happen in a browser without flash ; http://acko.net/files/projective/index.html
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:23 alkemann hey
# Feb 24th 2009, 15:15 jperras alkemann: hey
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:59 d1rk it could produce more switchers...
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:58 _nate_ k, brb
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:58 _nate_ heh
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:58 d1rk _nate_: well, maybe they plan to invade the windows world with more apps...
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:54 _nate_ d1rk: I mean, it's not like they have any incentive to encourage Windows development ;-)
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:53 _nate_ well, that'd require Apple's full company support, which, for Window's development, they probably wouldn't do
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:49 d1rk _nate_: yeah, would great if they open that to other developers.
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:38 _nate_ I'm sure Apple had to write a lot of custom libraries and UI rendering code to get Windows to do this
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:32 d1rk i coded c# for some years, but i would have no idea on how to do this.
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:32 _nate_ oh, yes, I suppose so
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:32 d1rk _nate_: having the look and feel of apple on win-machines.
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:31 _nate_ d1rk: sorry, do what exactly?
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:30 d1rk _nate_: yeah, but when apple can do it, others can too?
# Feb 24th 2009, 12:30 d1rk just bought a new 17" mac, but it takes weeks to get it. And i have to stick to win on some workplaces.. so, what should i say, more of that