| bio | website | stackoverflow.com/users/20133/… |
|---|---|---|
| location | Oklahoma City, OK | |
| age | 30 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 9 months |
| seen | Dec 16 '11 at 13:51 | |
| stats | profile views | 15 |
I am a senior applications developer for Chesapeake Energy specializing in GIS applications. I specialize in C#.NET, WPF/Silverlight/MVVM, Oracle Spatial, and ESRI technologies.
In my free time I spend time with my wife and kids, study Koine Greek, and practice target shooting.
|
Aug 10 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
|
Jun 16 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Jun 16 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Jun 16 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Jun 16 |
accepted | Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? |
|
Jun 16 |
revised |
Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? edited title; edited body |
|
Jun 16 |
comment |
Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? Yeah, I think you have a good point here. The *nix culture is a culture indeed. |
|
Jun 16 |
comment |
Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? Just browsing through the Ubuntu repositories (via Software Center). Almost all of the summaries include the language within the first sentence. I find it kind of funny that most Linux developers seem to be actually developing for other Linux developers instead of users. |
|
Jun 16 |
comment |
Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? The Ubuntu repository has an amazing amount of package descriptions that the first five words contain the language. I'm a developer myself, but I never figured my users cared. I could understand, however, that being open source, it might have more meaning, but are we developing for people or other developers? |
|
Jun 16 |
awarded | Student |
|
Jun 16 |
asked | Why do Linux applications often put the language it was written with in the summary? |
|
Aug 20 |
awarded | Supporter |