Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
> >
> > If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
> > in /usr/bin.
> >
> > Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
> >
> > J?rg
>
Alan DuBoff wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
> > As my dad always said, "Actions speak louder than words." Demonstrate
> > your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your
> > e-mails.
>
> +1 for your Dad's community project!
I am sorry that even yo
>My experience has been that ARC is very agreeable to work with people to
>figure out new ways of doing things when needed. It took us several
>failed attempts, but working together we found a way to document
>interface change in the GNOME desktop that is suitable to ARC and
>which also isn't s
>As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
>OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
ARC does not "decide" as much as approves, approves w/ TCRs or denies.
But projects approved by the ARC are often implemented so to claim
that that is impossible is ludicrous.
But they are i
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
> they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
> name is a conflict with another existing one.
>
> I recommend that J?rg make a proposal for such a change without making
> su
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>>
>>
>>> J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
>>> they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
>>> name is a conflict with another existing
On Dec 14, 2007 7:44 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow
> OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with
> Linux distros (and *BSDs) that are also growing and evolving at
> different rates. But it may be w
Norm Jacobs wrote:
> Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the
> ImageMagick open source project that chose the name "compare" for their
> program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest
> of the ImageMagick commands, but there was a reasonable e
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full
> of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were
> really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already
> cancel,accept etc. It is very important for adoption o
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss,
> not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please.
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Nicolas Williams wrote:
> > > Why are we still
Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
> >For this reason, the "compare" from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
> >or it needs to be put into a different directory.
>
>
> Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
> why don't you rename yours?
Looks like you are unwi
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Joep Vesseur wrote:
> > > On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > > The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
> > > > appeared
> > > > in /usr/bin. For this reason,
Stephen Lau wrote:
> This is not a governance issue, take it off of ogb-discuss.
The answers I saw make it obvious that it in fact is a governance issue.
J?rg
--
EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js at cs.tu-berlin.de(uni)
John Plocher wrote:
> [trimmed off os-discuss, probably should also trim off ogb-discuss]
>
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on
> > OpenSolaris
> > and not just ignorant domination from Sun.
> >
> > Do we have an OpenSolaris commun
>For this reason, the "compare" from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
>or it needs to be put into a different directory.
Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
why don't you rename yours?
Since there is already a plain file compare program "cmp" which
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
>>> For this reason, the "compare" from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
>>> or it needs to be put into a different directory.
>>
>> Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command;
>> why don't you rename you
Joep Vesseur wrote:
> On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
> > appeared
> > in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express.
>
> I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC ca
Ghee Teo wrote:
> Collaboration also needs to happen in reasonable context.
>It seems your argument is that your compare exist before hand,
> therefore it
> can not be used. This is more like a trademark game. The OpenSolaris
> community can not afford to search every single binary e
Frank.Hofmann at Sun.COM wrote:
> > Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using
> > the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick?
>
> "compare" as a word dates back to probably 1000BC when the latin language
> developed. Its use in english is post-norman, t
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
>
>> As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
>> OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
>
> ARC does not "decide" as much as approves, approves w/ TCRs or denies.
>
> But projects approved by the ARC are often implemented so
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 08:35:33PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
> OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
You've jumped the shark.
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>
>> J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
>> they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
>> name is a conflict with another existing one.
>>
>> I recommend that J?rg
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared
> in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express.
I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing
netcat (PSARC 2007/389)
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:04:28PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Everything is ready for a long time and waiting for integration.
> The SFW makefile system is undocumented and idiosyncratic
> and it does not seem to support all I need.
>
> If the makefilesystem is usable, somebody just kows how
Joerg:
>> You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising:
>> run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris,
>
> As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not
> do this!
>
> You are responsible to allow approved arc
Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
> PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
> for which the product is "ARC'ed".
>
> Your "compare" is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC
> case proposing it.
>
> Your "compare" does not exist in the context of the produc
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> As my dad always said, "Actions speak louder than words." Demonstrate
> your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your
> e-mails.
+1 for your Dad's community project!
--
Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group
>You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
>
>If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
>in /usr/bin.
>
>Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
fo
Ghee Teo wrote:
> > It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on
> > OpenSolaris
> > and not just ignorant domination from Sun.
> >
> Let not argue your case by calling us ignorant! The point is
> imagemagik is integrated.
> It is not against any ARC rule in name
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion:
>
> If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used
> in /usr/bin.
>
> Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions.
>
> J?rg
>
Seriously: Could you cite the precedent
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
>
>> PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under
>> for which the product is "ARC'ed".
>>
>> Your "compare" is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC
>> case proposing it.
>>
>> Your "compare" does
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Norm Jacobs wrote:
>
>
>> Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the
>> ImageMagick open source project that chose the name "compare" for their
>> program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest
>> of the ImageMagick com
Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
> >> It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
> >
> >WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick
> >name
> >is thus illegal.
>
> Says who? And who keeps the record or registry?
Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric
J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing one.
I recommend that J?rg make a proposal for such a change without making
such a proposal specific to his trouble
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:10:25PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Nicolas Williams wrote:
> >
> >
> >> J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
> >> they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
> >> name is a confl
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
>
>
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
>>> WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick
>>> name
>>> is thus illegal.
>>>
>> Says who? And who keeps the record or regist
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
>
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
>>>
>>> WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick
>>> name
>>> is thus illegal.
>>
>> Says who? And who keeps the record or registry
Actually, we have a cooperative process for dealing with this kind of
thing. It's call ARCing.
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
>
>>> For this reason, the "compare" from imagemagick either needs to be renamed
>>> or it needs to be put into a different directory.
>>>
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>
>
>> J?rg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
>> they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
>> name is a conflict with another existing one.
>>
>> I recommend that J?rg make a proposal f
>Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
>
>>
>> >It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
>>
>> Why would you conclude that?
>>
>> It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
>
>WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name
>is thus illegal.
Says
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
> OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
It is clearly possible to implement ARC decisions in OpenSolaris - there
are hundreds if not thousands of examples of this happening already.
There are difficulties in
I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss,
not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> > Why are we still arguing about this stuff?
> >
> > You
Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
>
> >It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
>
> Why would you conclude that?
>
> It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name
is thus illegal.
> If you want t
>It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious
Why would you conclude that?
It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins.
If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with
the ImageMagick folks.
I thinkt hat integrating open source projects "as is" is vastly
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:44 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Why should I rename that exists in the public for a long time just
> because
> some uncooperative people reused the name?
It's really irritating that ImageMagick grabbed command-line namespace
this way. It's worse than you think, J?rg: "c
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Joep Vesseur wrote:
> > On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
> > > appeared
> > > in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris E
[Dropping opensolaris-discuss & ogb-discuss because this is really an ARC
issue, and I don't need 4 copies of every e-mail in this thread.]
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Joep Vesseur wrote:
>> On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>
>>> The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before
[Dropping opensolaris-discuss & ogb-discuss because this is really an ARC
issue, and I don't need 4 copies of every e-mail in this thread.]
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> We did have a long discussion in the arc mailing list and agreed not to put
> names into /usr/bin that would cause name clashes.
This is not a governance issue, take it off of ogb-discuss.
John Plocher wrote:
> [trimmed off os-discuss, probably should also trim off ogb-discuss]
>
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
>> It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on
>> OpenSolaris
>> and not just ignorant domin
[trimmed off os-discuss, probably should also trim off ogb-discuss]
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on OpenSolaris
> and not just ignorant domination from Sun.
>
> Do we have an OpenSolaris community or is this just a fake?
>
> The rea
50 matches
Mail list logo
