"John Keiser" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Frankly, there are only going to be a few major contributors whose toolkits
are going to be *extremely* widely used, and GNU is probably one of them.
Making it easy to type and use and think about (less mental friction) is a
good thing.
Although not
's ugly. I truly do not
know what "most people" think.
--John Keiser
-Original Message-
From: Thomas J Lukasik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 1999 9:19 PM
To: John Keiser; Classpat 2
Subject: Re: org.gnu vs. gnu (was Re: Congratulations)
Hey, I've got a great solution. We start a "gnu" TLD to go along with "com",
"org", etc. Problem solved, everyone's happy, we all find more constructive
things to debate and/or get on with writing code.
Wes
Wow. This is the most discussion we've had on any topic in a long time
around here. This is the most ridiculous thing to have a flame war about
ever. So I'll pledge to stop right here. Everyone else can send
one more message if they want to.
The vast bulk of what we are writing is in the
-
From: Aaron M. Renn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 8:00 AM
To: Wes Biggs
Cc: Classpath
Subject: Re: org.gnu vs. gnu (was Re: Congratulations)
Wow. This is the most discussion we've had on any topic in a long time
around here. This is the most ridiculous
Greetings,
Fascinating.
I wonder how loud the hue and cry would be if Microsoft decided to
arbitrarily use a top-level package name 'microsoft.*' because of
visibility 'advertising' purposes, and they think it's an arbitrary
standard, and besides EVERYBODY knows who Microsoft is
Morgan Schweers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you want to talk the talk of following standards, you'd best walk
the walk as well. This is a standard, and violating it just because you
think it's arbitrary is...distinctly offensive at best.
We're all for standards around here... just not
John Keiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But while we don't need to decide now, I think we *do* need to
decide before release.
Release? What's that? :)
--
Paul Fisher * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Sep 12, 1999 at 11:13:37PM -0700, John Keiser wrote:
OK, here it is in writing: I am absolutely serious, "org.gnu" takes more
energy than "gnu". But it's not about typing energy, it's about thinking
energy, the minimization of which is (IMO) one of the principal factors in
designing
Thomas J Lukasik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Classpath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, September 13, 1999 1:19 AM
Subject: RE: org.gnu vs. gnu (was Re: Congratulations)
OK, here it is in writing: I am absolutely serious, "org.gnu" takes more
energy than "gnu". But it's not ab
someone **begs** me to come out of
retirement =8j)
TJL
-Original Message-
From: Wes Biggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: John Keiser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Thomas J Lukasik [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Classpath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, September 13, 1999 2:10 AM
Subject: Re: org.gnu vs. gnu (was Re: Co
I wonder how loud the hue and cry would be if
Microsoft decided to arbitrarily use a top-level
package name 'microsoft.*'
I would have no problem with it, but...
but I *DO* know that even they use com.ms
(which is wrong, but at least closer)
I have a real problem with this, because
Wow, didn't know this many people were alive and computing on Sundays :)
My two cents: gnu.* is a hell of a lot easier to use and think about than
org.gnu.*. I still think it looks silly to import com.sun like in JavaDoc.
But I perfectly understand them putting stuff they *don't* want other
13 matches
Mail list logo
