Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Nov 16, 2007 11:31 PM, Tuomo Valkonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007-11-16, Craig Brozefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yah, sucks to write free software, perhaps you should just stop. Indeed, Ion3 is my final gift to the FOSS herd, that it can never hope to repay. After that any software I might create, will come without any license at all (the djb way). With or without source, I have not yet decided. Probably without, since FOSS is degrading into a pile of steaming shit so fast, that I'm likely to be switching to Windows within a few years time, and binaries will work just fine there. Come on Tuomo. Don't get so upset of not being paid back for your efforts in some way or the other. Let me ask you this. How many free software have you used your self? For how many have you paid back? At least with a thank you towards the authors? Just think for a while and reply and don't reply just for the sake of winning an argument. Is it really worth to stir up all this fuss here? Hmm... I guess (L)GPL isn't very free. It isn't, in fact; and I do consider the BSD license more free. In fact, the name use terms in my license are basically all that I care about; the LGPL is just baggage. If some thing in your license is just baggage then just remove it. Put what you just care for and people will love you for it. Don't read this post with an insulting view. I am just politely pointing out some thing in a friendly way :-) kind regards Siju
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-17 21:38 +0530, Siju George wrote: Come on Tuomo. Don't get so upset of not being paid back for your efforts in some way or the other. I don't expect to get paid back, but I'd rather people not fuck with me after all my efforts, as the distros do. Let me ask you this. How many free software have you used your self? For how many have you paid back? At least with a thank you towards the authors? Not much worth thanking for there. Most of the good stuff is clones that I could have pirated anyway. It just happens that FOSS crap has become dominant among many of those programs. And for browser I use Opera. (Even warez groups, BTW, often tend to distribute their cracks alongside the pirated copy, instead of distributing modified binaries only. Yeah, and version is apparent from the file name listed by sites.) If some thing in your license is just baggage then just remove it. I thought about that, but it was just simpler to extend the LGPL. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Nov 16, 2007 11:37 PM, Tuomo Valkonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure OpenBSD would like very much for me to distribute some ancient and significantly modified release as the latest. Except, of course, I don't have the resources for such to have much of an effect, unlike The Party, i.e. the big distros. If OpenBSD changed its license and put in restrictions you would have no other way but to distribute the old one. See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. kind regards Siju
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Nov 17, 2007 9:54 PM, Tuomo Valkonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007-11-17 21:38 +0530, Siju George wrote: Come on Tuomo. Don't get so upset of not being paid back for your efforts in some way or the other. I don't expect to get paid back, but I'd rather people not fuck with me after all my efforts, as the distros do. Let me ask you this. How many free software have you used your self? For how many have you paid back? At least with a thank you towards the authors? Not much worth thanking for there. Most of the good stuff is clones that I could have pirated anyway. I just don't get your point here Tuomo. You don't consider the least thing you can do ( i.e to thank the authors ) a worth while effort because you have the option to pirate ( is it an option? isn't it illegal? are illegal stuff decent options? ) . But you get upset at people who work on your software so that is is made available to the masses more easily, because they are unable to continue their good work, because of the new license restrictions you yourself brought in. So just help them out. Change you licence back to some really free one like the BSDL. You yourself said == In fact, the name use terms in my license are basically all that I care about; the LGPL is just baggage. == this will most likely solve the problem. Being a programmer yourself you should be more aware of the chaos all the different flavors of licenses create while sharing code. I politely urge not to add your own terms and create your own licenses if you would like to share your code in FOSS. It just happens that FOSS crap has become dominant among many of those programs. And for browser I use Opera. (Even warez groups, BTW, often tend to distribute their cracks alongside the pirated copy, instead of distributing modified binaries only. Yeah, and version is apparent from the file name listed by sites.) If some thing in your license is just baggage then just remove it. I thought about that, but it was just simpler to extend the LGPL. Please re-think your decision. I am sure your software has been beneficial to a lot of people and so let it continue to be beneficial. In the long run I am sure you will see random addition of clauses to FOSS licenses will not help either you or people who maintain your software or the users of your software. Hope you will make a helping move that is beneficial to all :-) Kind Regards Siju
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Nov 17, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 11:37 PM, Tuomo Valkonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure OpenBSD would like very much for me to distribute some ancient and significantly modified release as the latest. Except, of course, I don't have the resources for such to have much of an effect, unlike The Party, i.e. the big distros. If OpenBSD changed its license and put in restrictions you would have no other way but to distribute the old one. See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. The real kicker is that your license change hurt everyone involved. Stupid Linux users will *still* pester you about Ion_NOT- SUPPORTED-0.1. On top of that, you've lost arguably your most competent user base due to licensing incompatibilities. I don't think you really care though. You sound like a very bitter person. --- Jason Dixon DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
* Siju George [2007-11-17]: If OpenBSD changed its license and put in restrictions you would have no other way but to distribute the old one. See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. Could you move this stupid flame war elsewhere, please? Or even better, just stop it. cheers, Nikolay
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-17 22:10 +0530, Siju George wrote: See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. The extra terms in the license are there for a reason, you know. Distros far bigger than OpenBSD fucking with you by distributing Xft-modified versions and ancient development snapshots for years. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Please immediately take this to your own list, instead of spamming this list further. On 2007-11-17 22:10 +0530, Siju George wrote: See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. The extra terms in the license are there for a reason, you know. Distros far bigger than OpenBSD fucking with you by distributing Xft-modified versions and ancient development snapshots for years. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Nov 17, 2007 10:38 PM, Nikolay Sturm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Siju George [2007-11-17]: If OpenBSD changed its license and put in restrictions you would have no other way but to distribute the old one. See it is not the OpenBSD people who tarnishes you. It is your own license restrictions that are working against you. Could you move this stupid flame war elsewhere, please? Or even better, just stop it. Done. Full stop . cheers, cheer to you too :-) kind regards Siju
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-17 12:03 -0500, Jason Dixon wrote: I don't think you really care though. You sound like a very bitter person. I tend to like bitter. And stout and other varieties too. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The version in tree is before the license change; the additional restrictions on the newer code are a problem. They are not a problem for reasonable distributors that care to pay a bit of respect towards the author's time and work. Of course, reason, literacy, and respect towards authors and persoanl choice are something seldom seen among the FOSS herd, rather replacing them with blind ideology and monocultures. It is a popular myth that you have to provide the new release within 28 days, and although I encourage that, it is not true and what the license says. Alternatively, you must after those 28 days prominently notify the user installing the software that the release is likely to be antiquated, not representative of the project's present state, and the author will not provide support for it. Not much asked, in my opinion. You could even base this notification on a dead-man switch, which would be quite nice even generally, considering package maintainers often going MIA. Boy, that's a lot of must's in that paragraph. Sure sounds free. It's free, but you MUST list of things What's great about me jumping into this conversation is that you talking about respect of the author is so interesting. I don't use your software, but I am sure you use OpenSSH. And now you are telling me what I (who distribute OpenBSD with all the things) must do. You say Not much asked, in my opinion. But you did not ask. You demanded, and everyone can see that.
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16, Craig Brozefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yah, sucks to write free software, perhaps you should just stop. Indeed, Ion3 is my final gift to the FOSS herd, that it can never hope to repay. After that any software I might create, will come without any license at all (the djb way). With or without source, I have not yet decided. Probably without, since FOSS is degrading into a pile of steaming shit so fast, that I'm likely to be switching to Windows within a few years time, and binaries will work just fine there. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The version in tree is before the license change; the additional restrictions on the newer code are a problem. They are not a problem for reasonable distributors that care to pay a bit of respect towards the author's time and work. Of course, reason, literacy, and respect towards authors and persoanl choice are something seldom seen among the FOSS herd, rather replacing them with blind ideology and monocultures. It is a popular myth that you have to provide the new release within 28 days, and although I encourage that, it is not true and what the license says. Alternatively, you must after those 28 days prominently notify the user installing the software that the release is likely to be antiquated, not representative of the project's present state, and the author will not provide support for it. Not much asked, in my opinion. You could even base this notification on a dead-man switch, which would be quite nice even generally, considering package maintainers often going MIA. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007/11/16 17:08, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: The Ion3 port at [1] is obsolete and should be upgraded, or at least users be made very sure that they don't come asking me for help. It is also misnamed: there's no such things as Ion 20070318. It's Ion3, __development snapshot__ 20070318. Read that emphasised portion again, and think for a moment. Users should be made _highly_ aware of that fact, especially when distributing such antiquated releases. [1]: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386/ion-20070318p1.tgz-long.html The version in tree is before the license change; the additional restrictions on the newer code are a problem. Your new license requires that all old OS releases with Ion(tm) packages have upgrades made available within 28 days, even if that OS release is no longer supported. This is somewhat counter-productive imho, since the change encourages people to continue distributing the obsolete code that came with the standard LGPL (or just remove the package), rather than update...
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 04:26:05PM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The version in tree is before the license change; the additional restrictions on the newer code are a problem. They are not a problem for reasonable distributors that care to pay a bit of respect towards the author's time and work. Of course, reason, literacy, and respect towards authors and persoanl choice are something seldom seen among the FOSS herd, rather replacing them with blind ideology and monocultures. It is a popular myth that you have to provide the new release within 28 days, and although I encourage that, it is not true and what the license says. Alternatively, you must after those 28 days prominently notify the user installing the software that the release is likely to be antiquated, not representative of the project's present state, and the author will not provide support for it. Not much asked, in my opinion. You could even base this notification on a dead-man switch, which would be quite nice even generally, considering package maintainers often going MIA. Package is no longer maintained due to your license change. I fail to see the relevance of trying to retroactively impose its new terms. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Marco Peereboom wrote: [snipped] Meanwhile I'll use Ion3, __development snapshot__ 20070318 until something that suits me better comes along. Wasn't there a fork already that was based on the last version with GPL? -- Antti Harri
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 11:05 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: Package is no longer maintained due to your license change. So remove it. Speaks loads of the so-called quality of the OpenBSD distribution when it distributes ancient unmaintained software with various bugs. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Tuomo Valkonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 2007-11-16 10:13 -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: Boy, that's a lot of must's in that paragraph. Sure sounds free. Typically free means: free for the herd to do anything, including fucking the author in the arse. Straitjacket and pain in the arse for the author who has to bear with the herd. Yah, sucks to write free software, perhaps you should just stop. So, please, spare me of your ideology. And spare us your gripes. plonk -- Sincerely, Craig Brozefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] what a klon - neko http://www.red-bean.com/~craig Less matter, more form! - Bruno Schulz ignazz, I am truly korrupted by yore sinful tzourceware. -jb
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 10:13 -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: Boy, that's a lot of must's in that paragraph. Sure sounds free. Typically free means: free for the herd to do anything, including fucking the author in the arse. Straitjacket and pain in the arse for the author who has to bear with the herd. So, please, spare me of your ideology. It's free, but you MUST list of things Hmm... I guess (L)GPL isn't very free. It isn't, in fact; and I do consider the BSD license more free. In fact, the name use terms in my license are basically all that I care about; the LGPL is just baggage. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Licenses can not be retro actively imposed. This package was done before your license change and therefore it'll remain just like it is. I am a pre-ion user and can't even begin to tell you how retarded your new license is. You got what you wanted, you rendered your open source developments useless. Enjoy. Meanwhile I'll use Ion3, __development snapshot__ 20070318 until something that suits me better comes along. On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 05:08:07PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: The Ion3 port at [1] is obsolete and should be upgraded, or at least users be made very sure that they don't come asking me for help. It is also misnamed: there's no such things as Ion 20070318. It's Ion3, __development snapshot__ 20070318. Read that emphasised portion again, and think for a moment. Users should be made _highly_ aware of that fact, especially when distributing such antiquated releases. [1]: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386/ion-20070318p1.tgz-long.html -- Tuomo
Ion3 port is obsolete
The Ion3 port at [1] is obsolete and should be upgraded, or at least users be made very sure that they don't come asking me for help. It is also misnamed: there's no such things as Ion 20070318. It's Ion3, __development snapshot__ 20070318. Read that emphasised portion again, and think for a moment. Users should be made _highly_ aware of that fact, especially when distributing such antiquated releases. [1]: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386/ion-20070318p1.tgz-long.html -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 20:13 +0100, Marc Balmer wrote: but windows does not need a window manager... Indeed, Ion is my only remaining umblical cord to FOSS crap, and no thanks to the FOSS herd, but vestiges of software from the age before the FOSS craze, from the age before the WIMP desktop model became hegemonic. If Windows could provide something like Ion, I wouldn't think twice of switching to it. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Who is talking about using windows apps? I just said I ported it work in cygwin so that I don't have to use windows at work. GNU userland beats even MS cli commands. On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 10:27:37PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 13:45 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: Man you are in luck. I happened to make ion work on windows to make it more bearable. It's on my site; enjoy! Yeah, right. Actually, with the compositing manager now in Vista (which they call the Desktop Window manager, heh), it might be possible to hack a sorry emulation of a WM by replacing it. Even a tabbing and tiling one by scaling the applications' backbuffers, which would of course make things look like shit. And then you'd have to hack around the application-drawn (AFAIK) window frames. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 13:45 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: Man you are in luck. I happened to make ion work on windows to make it more bearable. It's on my site; enjoy! Yeah, right. Actually, with the compositing manager now in Vista (which they call the Desktop Window manager, heh), it might be possible to hack a sorry emulation of a WM by replacing it. Even a tabbing and tiling one by scaling the applications' backbuffers, which would of course make things look like shit. And then you'd have to hack around the application-drawn (AFAIK) window frames. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 08:07:12PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 11:40 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: I have a suggestion for you; why don't you rename your software to something else instead of ion, it'll make all the evil people using what-used-to-be-called-ion go away. Problem solved. The whole point is that Ion is name that is associated with me, and the distros are tarnishing it by distributing significantly modified and out-dated software as Ion, without prominently mentioning this. You knew that when you distributed the original under its original license. If you didn't that is your fault. Don't blame me for using free software under a relatively well understood license. I'm sure OpenBSD would like very much for me to distribute some ancient and significantly modified release as the latest. Except, of course, I don't have the resources for such to have much of an effect, unlike The Party, i.e. the big distros. The only thing I'd like (I am not cocky enough to pretend I know what the entire OpenBSD community wants) is for the software to get its original license back so that it could be maintained like it was. Oh and FWIW, OpenBSD left ion almost identical to your specifications. The only thing that was modified was to have the large menu when pressing F12. The rest was 100% identical to what you did. OpenBSD stayed within the spirit of your developments however you chose to sever the ties to the OpenBSD project the second you changed that license. OpenBSD fulfilled all legal requirements as per your original license. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 12:25 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: You knew that when you distributed the original under its original license. If you didn't that is your fault. Don't blame me for using free software under a relatively well understood license. No, I just didn't think back then about the license so much; I did not realise what kind of dickheads and fuckwits the FOSS herd is composed of. Call me naive if you want. But as the project started to gain popularity, you get a lot of people complaining and asking help for ancient versions distributed by the distributions that also have in the meanwhile become more powerful, and gained more central control over conveniently installable software. And at the same time FOSS detoriorates by forcing the anti-aliasing fascist fontconfig/Xft nearly everywhere, and now the herd modifies the version of Ion their distros carry to use that crap, which I will have nothing to do with until my demands [1] are met. When I first started out on Ion, I had hope in FOSS. All that has been lost now. Most people are dickheads and fuckwits everywhere, no matter their proclaimed ideals of so-called freedom. FOSS licenses are only for naive people and those who go with the herd. As should be apparent, I don't. [1]: http://iki.fi/tuomov/ion/faq/entries/Blurred_fonts.html -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16, Craig Brozefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yah, sucks to write free software, perhaps you should just stop. Indeed, Ion3 is my final gift to the FOSS herd, that it can never hope to repay. After that any software I might create, will come without any license at all (the djb way). With or without source, I have not yet decided. Probably without, since FOSS is degrading into a pile of steaming shit so fast, that I'm likely to be switching to Windows within a few years time, and binaries will work just fine there. but windows does not need a window manager...
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 11:40 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: I have a suggestion for you; why don't you rename your software to something else instead of ion, it'll make all the evil people using what-used-to-be-called-ion go away. Problem solved. The whole point is that Ion is name that is associated with me, and the distros are tarnishing it by distributing significantly modified and out-dated software as Ion, without prominently mentioning this. I'm sure OpenBSD would like very much for me to distribute some ancient and significantly modified release as the latest. Except, of course, I don't have the resources for such to have much of an effect, unlike The Party, i.e. the big distros. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
It works fine as it is and it won't be removed. You should have thought of the legal repercussions of writing free software. You gave it away back then so you can't take it back. As they say, you can't put the shit back in the horse. You can cry us a river all day long using strong profanity. It will not change the law. I have a suggestion for you; why don't you rename your software to something else instead of ion, it'll make all the evil people using what-used-to-be-called-ion go away. Problem solved. On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 07:27:53PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 11:05 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: Package is no longer maintained due to your license change. So remove it. Speaks loads of the so-called quality of the OpenBSD distribution when it distributes ancient unmaintained software with various bugs. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 06:01:12PM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16, Craig Brozefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yah, sucks to write free software, perhaps you should just stop. Indeed, Ion3 is my final gift to the FOSS herd, that it can never hope to repay. After that any software I might create, will come without any license at all (the djb way). With or without source, I have not yet decided. Probably without, since FOSS is degrading into a pile of steaming shit so fast, that I'm likely to be switching to Windows within a few years time, and binaries will work just fine there. good for you, and what did you have for breakfast ? -- Gilles Chehade http://www.evilkittens.org/ http://www.evilkittens.org/blog/gilles/
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16 13:38 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: You are naive. The open source community is harsh and does not tend to cater to someone's feelings. Kind of like the real world. In the harsh real world the companies sue you for distributing their software. I might just as well adopt their licenses and practices: as you have admitted, the FOSS herd is harsh and no different from them. I fail to see how that is your problem. Its free software, they change it they deal with it. They don't deal with it: they don't rename the software and tell users to not bug the original author. As long the software clearly points to the original author, users will come asking support for the distro's version. That is the case if the software has a face and has not become such generic software that just is there, and of which there are known to be various implementations (such as the basic *nix tools). Why do you care if someone else is starring at blurry fonts? I care when they make it purposefully difficult for me to personally use unblurry fonts, or some particular font (such as the beautiful X Helvetica bitmap font, which is often blocked). I will not have my software support such software that takes away or makes personal choice for me very difficult. Dealing with Linux people tends to anger people. Maybe you should try to leave the linuxers behind and work in a more constructive community. And that is? While indeed *BSD (of which only FreeBSD is likely to have the driver support I'd need) don't suffer from such utter and total crap as udev, and other recent idiot box idiocies in the Linux kernel, they still unfortunately rely on the same luserland (sic) that tends to be designed for the monoculturist desktop projects these days. Your bitterness stems from getting involved with people you are incompatible with. That's about 99% of people. As witnessed in this thread. And if you are that pissed off, why don't you just quit? You don't owe anyone anything. I like to finish what I've started. Then I'll quit. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 12:25 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: You knew that when you distributed the original under its original license. If you didn't that is your fault. Don't blame me for using free software under a relatively well understood license. No, I just didn't think back then about the license so much; I did not realise what kind of dickheads and fuckwits the FOSS herd is composed of. Call me naive if you want. But as the project started to gain popularity, you get a lot of people complaining and asking help for ancient versions distributed by the distributions that also have in the meanwhile become more powerful, and gained more central control over conveniently installable software. And at the same time FOSS detoriorates by forcing the anti-aliasing fascist fontconfig/Xft nearly everywhere, and now the herd modifies the version of Ion their distros carry to use that crap, which I will have nothing to do with until my demands [1] are met. When I first started out on Ion, I had hope in FOSS. All that has been lost now. Most people are dickheads and fuckwits everywhere, no matter their proclaimed ideals of so-called freedom. FOSS licenses are only for naive people and those who go with the herd. As should be apparent, I don't. no tiene cojones, as the spaniard would say... [1]: http://iki.fi/tuomov/ion/faq/entries/Blurred_fonts.html
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 09:06:21PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 12:25 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: You knew that when you distributed the original under its original license. If you didn't that is your fault. Don't blame me for using free software under a relatively well understood license. No, I just didn't think back then about the license so much; I did not realise what kind of dickheads and fuckwits the FOSS herd is composed of. Call me naive if you want. But as the project started You are naive. The open source community is harsh and does not tend to cater to someone's feelings. Kind of like the real world. to gain popularity, you get a lot of people complaining and asking help for ancient versions distributed by the distributions that also have in the meanwhile become more powerful, and gained more central control over conveniently installable software. And at the same time FOSS detoriorates by forcing the anti-aliasing fascist fontconfig/Xft nearly everywhere, and now the herd modifies the version of Ion their distros carry to use that crap, which I will have nothing to do with until my demands [1] are met. I fail to see how that is your problem. Its free software, they change it they deal with it. The only choice you have to make is how much fun to poke at those people. Why do you care if someone else is starring at blurry fonts? Why do you care if someone else is watching those fonts scroll by at a snails pace slowing down their overall machine? Really, why do you care about someone's stupidity? When I first started out on Ion, I had hope in FOSS. All that has been lost now. Most people are dickheads and fuckwits everywhere, no matter their proclaimed ideals of so-called freedom. FOSS licenses are only for naive people and those who go with the herd. As should be apparent, I don't. You should take up some drama classes and put that anger to use. Dealing with Linux people tends to anger people. Maybe you should try to leave the linuxers behind and work in a more constructive community. I for one truly appreciate ion and its intentions. Knowing other folks that use ion, they agree and do the same. Your bitterness stems from getting involved with people you are incompatible with. I'll be the first to admit that getting involved in the Linux community is frustrating and boring. I therefore quit the community and found one that I am compatible with. And if you are that pissed off, why don't you just quit? You don't owe anyone anything. [1]: http://iki.fi/tuomov/ion/faq/entries/Blurred_fonts.html -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 09:20:34PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 20:13 +0100, Marc Balmer wrote: but windows does not need a window manager... Indeed, Ion is my only remaining umblical cord to FOSS crap, and no thanks to the FOSS herd, but vestiges of software from the age before the FOSS craze, from the age before the WIMP desktop model became hegemonic. If Windows could provide something like Ion, I wouldn't think twice of switching to it. Man you are in luck. I happened to make ion work on windows to make it more bearable. It's on my site; enjoy! -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 10:23:02PM +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: On 2007-11-16 13:38 -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: You are naive. The open source community is harsh and does not tend to cater to someone's feelings. Kind of like the real world. In the harsh real world the companies sue you for distributing their software. I might just as well adopt their licenses and practices: as you have admitted, the FOSS herd is harsh and no different from them. So why are you acting all surprised? I fail to see how that is your problem. Its free software, they change it they deal with it. They don't deal with it: they don't rename the software and tell users to not bug the original author. As long the software clearly points to the original author, users will come asking support for the distro's version. That is the case if the software has a face and has not become such generic software that just is there, and of which there are known to be various implementations (such as the basic *nix tools). And you say: go away or nothing at all. Wow, thats really hard. Why do you care if someone else is starring at blurry fonts? I care when they make it purposefully difficult for me to personally use unblurry fonts, or some particular font (such as the beautiful X Helvetica bitmap font, which is often blocked). I will not have my software support such software that takes away or makes personal choice for me very difficult. How do they make it difficult for you? What you are saying is: I use their stuff and I don't like it. How about not using their stuff? Dealing with Linux people tends to anger people. Maybe you should try to leave the linuxers behind and work in a more constructive community. And that is? While indeed *BSD (of which only FreeBSD is likely to have the driver support I'd need) don't suffer from such utter and total crap as udev, and other recent idiot box idiocies in the Linux kernel, they still unfortunately rely on the same luserland (sic) that tends to be designed for the monoculturist desktop projects these days. The best community for you seems to be the Tuomo one. You know, your own world where everything is just like you want it. You know what, you could even control who gets a passport. Your bitterness stems from getting involved with people you are incompatible with. That's about 99% of people. As witnessed in this thread. Then why do you keep talking? And if you are that pissed off, why don't you just quit? You don't owe anyone anything. I like to finish what I've started. Then I'll quit. You don't need to release your code and put up with it. You can just keep it all to yourself. You are apparently a masochist that keeps asking for more. -- Tuomo
Re: Ion3 port is obsolete
On 2007-11-16, Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So why are you acting all surprised? What surprise? I said I used to have some hope in FOSS ages ago, but gradually it has worn off, to the extent that I no longer care for the cause at all. And you say: go away or nothing at all. Wow, thats really hard. It's still users bugging you, and a few more turned off from your software because the ancient or modified versions provided by the distros fail on them. How do they make it difficult for you? What you are saying is: I use their stuff and I don't like it. How about not using their stuff? That means not using a lot of software: it basically means limiting yourself to xterm (and a few other odd utilities, such as xdvi and gv, for now anyway). Soon maybe not even that, once the obsolete the old font system completely. Already e.g. Ubuntu at some point did not come with any fonts for the X core font system. Certainly you'd have no graphical browsers to use, none that can access any more pages than a text-mode one anyway. And unfortunately, while the Web indeed is crap, it has some useful and interesting information within it. Even on pages that refuse to work fine in text-mode browsers. The best community for you seems to be the Tuomo one. You know, your own world where everything is just like you want it. At least a world where not everything is polar to where you want it -- as things seem to be heading -- and where people are more open to your ideas. -- Tuomo
