Andreas,
Thanks a lot for taking the time to look into these problems and for the
patches.
Shouldn't we try to capture these problems with unit tests running across
Squeak and its derivatives ?
What would be the procedure to contribute to these tests ?
Sven
On 01 Sep 2010, at 06:16, Andreas R
2010/9/1 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez
> El mié, 01-09-2010 a las 15:44 +0900, Serge Stinckwich escribió:
> > Don't confuse open-source software with free software:
> >
> > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
>
> I think that this has already gone off-topic. The original a
El mié, 01-09-2010 a las 15:44 +0900, Serge Stinckwich escribió:
> Don't confuse open-source software with free software:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
I think that this has already gone off-topic. The original argument was
that Andreas wanted to open source it
Thanks
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2893
Network will be soon in our radar. full of broken code
Stef
On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:16 AM, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Hi Sven -
>
> I had a quick look at the failing tests on Pharo and they seem mostly the
> result of bugs in Pharo'
Don't confuse open-source software with free software:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
2010/8/31 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez :
> El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:43 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
>> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
>>
>> > El mar
Hi Sven -
I had a quick look at the failing tests on Pharo and they seem mostly
the result of bugs in Pharo's Network package. First, MimeDocument>>url
needs to return an instance of Url not a string (check the senders; all
users of it expect it to be a Url not a string) so if you change that
>
> That's all I'll contribute to this discussion for the moment. We're
> working with intellectual property lawyers to prepare our ESUG talk on
> open source licensing; hopefully we'll be able to touch on some of
> this then and have some useful resources for the community as an
> output.
Julian
2010/8/31 Levente Uzonyi :
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:>
> > "You must be kidding. The freedom to fork is a essential right of open
> > source software:
> > http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10379280-16.html
> >
> > http://asay.blogspot.com/2006/10/wither-right-to-fork
Originally I thought to shut up but today is the last days of summer holidays
and I'm a positive thinking
so let us try to help
My suggestions:
- put MIT now
- accept other submissions even open the repositories to people that
are
cool (lukas, philippe, sven)
- tr
On 31.08.2010 08:47, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
snip
Yeah, that's why I added the 20 4KB docs / sec number.
I really doubt the conversion will be a significant part of the processing time
if what you send out is so small you are able to convert 800k messages per
second...
It depends on the
On 8/30/2010 1:40 AM, Johan Brichau wrote:
I am not a lawyer but as far as I understand this topic, no license means
nobody can use the code at all, which contradicts the fact of having it in a
public repository (and you being perfectly happy of people using it).
Can you please clarify the lice
>> snip
>>
>>> Yeah, that's why I added the 20 4KB docs / sec number.
>>> I really doubt the conversion will be a significant part of the processing
>>> time if what you send out is so small you are able to convert 800k messages
>>> per second...
>>
>> It depends on the machine/load/etc.
>
don;t worry levente
Nicolas was sensitive to the fact that you laugh because you consider that our
process is close and that I
have all the powers, which is false. We proposed in the past to Nicolas to help
integrate changes
but this is too boring in pharo so I do the dirty work and should work
so now we understand why Pharo design is crap :)
Sorry I could resist
It would be nice if we were a bit more adults. What is strange is that
some people catalyze communication problems (me included) but we should live
with that.
I added your bench to the issue too.
Stef
On Aug 31, 2010, at
Hi -
Thanks everyone for the reasoned and civil responses. It is good to see
that we can have a disagreement without getting overly personal.
Unfortunately, it seems that I'm effectively offered a no-win
alternative here; I do not see how any of the discussed alternatives
would help me achiev
thanks added to http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2885
Stef
On Aug 31, 2010, at 12:22 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>
> In Squeak(CogVM):
> "7-bit ByteString"
> mediumDoc := ByteString new: 4096 streamContents: [ :stream |
> 4096 timesRepeat: [ stream nextPut: (Character value: 1
"Schwab,Wilhelm K" writes:
> Levente,
>
> I stand by the analogy of GPL's history and the more emotional
> undertones of the current discussion. Dismissing it won't make it go
> away.
IMHO you are fully right. The fact still is if something is OS it
forkable. Maye under certain conditions but it
e.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Levente Uzonyi
[le...@elte.hu]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:47 PM
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WebClient-Core port to Pharo 1.1 final
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote:
> GPL is designed to hold people (mostly commerc
On 31.08.2010 01:21, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
snip
Yeah, that's why I added the 20 4KB docs / sec number.
I really doubt the conversion will be a significant part of the
processing time if what you send out is so small you are able to
conv
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:43 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
> El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:25 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
>
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
2010/8/31 Levente Uzonyi :
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
Hi Pharoers,
snip
Come-on guys, despite Levente's cutting remark, you're not inferior to
squeakers ;) (and you don't have to answer to that stupid conclusion).
Uh, what rem
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
snip
Yeah, that's why I added the 20 4KB docs / sec number.
I really doubt the conversion will be a significant part of the processing
time if what you send out is so small you are able to convert 800k messages
per second...
It depends
2010/8/31 Nicolas Cellier :
> 2010/8/31 Levente Uzonyi :
>> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pharoers,
>>
>> snip
>>
>>> Come-on guys, despite Levente's cutting remark, you're not inferior to
>>> squeakers ;) (and you don't have to answer to that stupid conclusion).
>>
>> Uh, w
El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:43 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
>
> > El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:25 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
> > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> >
> > > Levente Uzonyi writes:
> >
> > > On Mon, 3
2010/8/31 Levente Uzonyi :
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>
>> Hi Pharoers,
>
> snip
>
>> Come-on guys, despite Levente's cutting remark, you're not inferior to
>> squeakers ;) (and you don't have to answer to that stupid conclusion).
>
> Uh, what remark?
>
Oh, you know, the missint
On 31.08.2010 00:34, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote:
snip
"MediumDoc is a pure ascii ByteString of size 4096"
[1 to: 10 do: [:ix |MediumDoc
squeakToUtf8]] timeToRun 362 384
[1 to: 10 do: [:ix | MediumDoc
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
Hi Pharoers,
snip
Come-on guys, despite Levente's cutting remark, you're not inferior to
squeakers ;) (and you don't have to answer to that stupid conclusion).
Uh, what remark?
Nicolas
snip
___
nday, August 30, 2010 6:25 PM
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WebClient-Core port to Pharo 1.1 final
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
Levente Uzonyi writes:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suggest that the people that want
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:25 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> Levente Uzonyi writes:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
I suggest that the people that want and k
nt: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:25 PM
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WebClient-Core port to Pharo 1.1 final
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> Levente Uzonyi writes:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>>>>
>
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote:
snip
"MediumDoc is a pure ascii ByteString of size 4096"
[1 to: 10 do: [:ix |MediumDoc
squeakToUtf8]] timeToRun 362 384
[1 to: 10 do: [:ix | MediumDoc
convertToEncoding: 'utf-8']] timeToRun 437 56
El mar, 31-08-2010 a las 00:25 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
>
> > Levente Uzonyi writes:
>
> > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> >
>
> I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build
> an ope
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
Levente Uzonyi writes:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
Why do you have to have your "own" library?
Did I say "pharo library"? reread
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote:
On Aug 30, 2010, at 2:57 47PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote:
On Aug 30, 2010, at 1:06 10PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suggest that the people that want and know,
(sorry, pine can't quote your mail correctly...)
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote:
El lun, 30-08-2010 a las 13:06 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
What I get from Andreas' words is that he's willing to make it open source
if it won't be forked.
"This is plain wrong, Yo
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
This mailing-list is a public space. There are web archives all over the places
and
people can post without been in it. I want to avoid personal emails exchange.
Now what should we run after him? Because the set up is like that no?
Because I'm extrem
This mailing-list is a public space. There are web archives all over the places
and
people can post without been in it. I want to avoid personal emails exchange.
Now what should we run after him? Because the set up is like that no?
Because I'm extremely busy so nobody has the luxury not to be not
2010/8/30 Stéphane Ducasse :
>
> On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:57 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>
>> Hi Pharoers,
>> I'm happy to read mail from Torsten, Igor and Miguel, thank you guys
>> that's constructive.
>> Andreas expressed his point very well, and i don't think it is
>> hostile, maybe a bit sarcastic
On Aug 30, 2010, at 9:57 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
> Hi Pharoers,
> I'm happy to read mail from Torsten, Igor and Miguel, thank you guys
> that's constructive.
> Andreas expressed his point very well, and i don't think it is
> hostile, maybe a bit sarcastic or disenchanted, but overall he keeps
Hi Pharoers,
I'm happy to read mail from Torsten, Igor and Miguel, thank you guys
that's constructive.
Andreas expressed his point very well, and i don't think it is
hostile, maybe a bit sarcastic or disenchanted, but overall he keeps
the door opened.
The first thing to do is to cool down, relax an
On 30/08/2010 12:06, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Now
- since the license is unclear
- since the license of the contributors is unclear
we will not use it as an infrastructural assets for Pharo. I imagine
that Seaside will not use it either.
We
thanks henrik
I always learn something :)
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
>>
>> Why do you have to have your "own" library?
>
> Did I say "pharo library"? reread carefully I said an "open-source one".
>>
2010/8/30 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez
> El lun, 30-08-2010 a las 18:25 +0300, Igor Stasenko escribió:
> > My 2 cents about WebClient.
> >
> > - it should be an (un)loadable external package, and i am fully agree
> > with Andreas on this point.
> > It is tempting to integrate it into image, do so
2010/8/30 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez :
> El lun, 30-08-2010 a las 18:25 +0300, Igor Stasenko escribió:
>> My 2 cents about WebClient.
>>
>> - it should be an (un)loadable external package, and i am fully agree
>> with Andreas on this point.
>> It is tempting to integrate it into image, do some tw
El lun, 30-08-2010 a las 18:25 +0300, Igor Stasenko escribió:
> My 2 cents about WebClient.
>
> - it should be an (un)loadable external package, and i am fully agree
> with Andreas on this point.
> It is tempting to integrate it into image, do some tweaks here and
> there and then ship it within a
El lun, 30-08-2010 a las 13:06 +0200, Levente Uzonyi escribió:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>> I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
> >>> open-source one.
> >>
> >> Why do you have to have your "own" library?
> >
> > Did I say "pha
My 2 cents about WebClient.
- it should be an (un)loadable external package, and i am fully agree
with Andreas on this point.
It is tempting to integrate it into image, do some tweaks here and
there and then ship it within a monolitic image.
But then, from maintainer's point of view, it is quite h
Johan Brichau wrote:
I am not a lawyer but as far as I understand this topic, no license
means nobody can use the code at all, which contradicts the fact of
having it in a public repository (and you being perfectly happy of
people using it).
IANAL. "no license" means it's public domain, so *an
Thanks
It skipped my radar since it is not marked as fixed.
do you want that I add you to the project developers on google so that you can
changed the tag value?
Stef
On Aug 30, 2010, at 3:35 PM, jaayer wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:57:47 -0700 Levente Uzonyi wrote
>
>> I d
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:57:47 -0700 Levente Uzonyi wrote
>I don't like the "magical" #asString, but you should discuss it with
>Andreas. Collection >> #ifEmpty: doesn't return nil, but the collection in
>the WebClient-Pharo package (and in Squeak), and I think it's better than
>nil
>> We do not want a process/system where one single person controls something
>> important.
>>
>> - first it does not scale.
>> - second it is not good for the ecosystem feeling.
>> - third we got burnt in the past (remember 3.9 fonts problems - 3.9 was
>> shipped with bug because
>
>> If you call (re)introducing #squeakToUtf8/#utf8ToSqueak instead of using
>> convertTo/FromEncoding: 'utf8', then yes.
>
> In Squeak these methods avoid the creation of the TextConverter object if the
> receiver is a ByteString, which is usually the case.
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/iss
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
We do not want a process/system where one single person controls something
important.
- first it does not scale.
- second it is not good for the ecosystem feeling.
- third we got burnt in the past (remember 3.9 fonts problems
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote:
On Aug 30, 2010, at 1:06 10PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
Why do you have to have your "own" library?
Did I sa
We do not want a process/system where one single person controls something
important.
- first it does not scale.
- second it is not good for the ecosystem feeling.
- third we got burnt in the past (remember 3.9 fonts problems - 3.9 was
shipped with bug because
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Lukas Renggli wrote:
We want a library where people can participate. Now Pharoers will decide,
I think that we do not have problem
with sharing on WebClient. I can understand that people do not like that
they cannot improve an infrastructure
that they will rely upon. We do n
>
> Personally, I'd call it forcing Squeakisms on anyone wanting to use
> WebClient, and potentially breaking any number of other packages.
>
> The rest I have no problems with, most are fixes/convenience methods which
> are already in, or should be introduced before Pharo 1.2 (for exampe the
Before some of us are continue to lament or are too quick in
decisions like removing/forking/reimplementing the web lib or
judging on all this I think it would be wise to wait for a
response from Andreas.
First: his response was directly to Sven (with Pharo in CC)
and please reread what he wrot
Levente Uzonyi writes:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
>>>
>>> Why do you have to have your "own" library?
>>
>> Did I say "pharo library"? reread carefully I said an "open-
On Aug 30, 2010, at 1:06 10PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
>>>
>>> Why do you have to have your "own" library?
>>
>> Did I say "pharo library"?
>> We want a library where people can participate. Now Pharoers will decide,
>> I think that we do not have problem
>> with sharing on WebClient. I can understand that people do not like that
>> they cannot improve an infrastructure
>> that they will rely upon. We do not want string to number conve
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
Why do you have to have your "own" library?
Did I say "pharo library"? reread carefully I said an "open-source one".
What I get from Andreas' words is t
>>
>> I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
>> open-source one.
>
> Why do you have to have your "own" library?
Did I say "pharo library"? reread carefully I said an "open-source one".
This is not our own library, this is a library we can contribute, control.
ok
On Aug 30, 2010, at 12:01 PM, jaayer wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:24:37 -0700 Stéphane Ducasse wrote
>
>> 3- Philippe contacted you with fixes several times and got no reply, sven
>> too so people thought that you do not want to talk to them. Apparently not
>> so this is
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Hi pharoers
What do you think?
I think that we should not have any software parts whose license is not set
clearly in Pharo.
So I will remove WebClient from Pharo.
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-sourc
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:24:37 -0700 Stéphane Ducasse wrote
>3- Philippe contacted you with fixes several times and got no reply, sven too
>so people thought that you do not want to talk to them. Apparently not
>so this is good.
Andreas was having mail issues. A few days ago I emai
Hi Andreas,
Thank you for clarifying your position and for pointing out the lack of a
proper license for WebClient code.
I and other people in the Pharo community made a mistake and we're sorry. We
will be more careful in the future.
But to our defense, as others pointed out, you're communicat
A little advertisement:
Cincom pushed the idea to have a lawyer at ESUG to explain such kind of
points, there will be a panel with Julian Fitzel, Bert Freudenberg so
we will all learn. Prepare your questions.
On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Johan Brichau wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Torsten Bergmann wrote:
> I agree with Andreas that the process for including packages in Pharo
> is not transparent (at least not me).
read the open and transparent discussions that happened over the past months in
this mailing-list: check for webClient in the tit
Hi Andreas,
I am not a lawyer but as far as I understand this topic, no license means
nobody can use the code at all, which contradicts the fact of having it in a
public repository (and you being perfectly happy of people using it).
Can you please clarify the license situation of those projects?
Adrian
Same for squeakSSL. :)
Stef
On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:03 AM, a...@netstyle.ch wrote:
> I fully agree with Stef.
>
> I don't remember why I assumed the license was MIT, maybe because on
> Andreas' blog it says: "we now have what I think is a pretty decent HTTP
> server and client implement
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <
stephane.duca...@inria.fr> wrote:
> Hi pharoers
>
> What do you think?
> I think that we should not have any software parts whose license is not set
> clearly in Pharo.
> So I will remove WebClient from Pharo.
>
It can still be maintained as an
A final point:
I can understand that andreas does not want to get fork. I understand that he
can think that
we are stealing code. I think that this is fair to think that. Now as miguel
mentioned about SPDF,
the solution is in the process: one way to avoid fork is to be open to other
changes
I agree with Andreas that the process for including packages in Pharo
is not transparent (at least not me). Dont know the process
for Squeak either - but at least we all should take care to keep the
whole platform and forks open. Maybe the license should be a
required field in Squeaksource for any
Hi pharoers
What do you think?
I think that we should not have any software parts whose license is not set
clearly in Pharo.
So I will remove WebClient from Pharo.
I suggest that the people that want and know, group together and build an
open-source one.
Stef
On Aug 30, 2010, at 12:00 AM, A
I fully agree with Stef.
I don't remember why I assumed the license was MIT, maybe because on
Andreas' blog it says: "we now have what I think is a pretty decent HTTP
server and client implementation for Squeak 4.1". Isn't the missing
license an issue for Squeak? Anyway, obviously its a no-go not
Sven and philippe
I was wondering what was the license of your submissions to webClient.
Because this will be also a problem. Either you totally give it to andreas and
he can do what he wants with it,
or you retain the right on the code and andreas has to decide what he will do
with it.
Since yo
Hi andreas
1- We talked a lot about Webclient used in the Pharo mailing-list and we were
stupid to think that you read it. Luckily you did it at last.
2- I'm also surprised that nobody checked the license (me the first). Shit
happens even with the best attitude. We are paying attention to contri
Hi Sven,
[cc: pharo list since I think there are some larger issues to discuss]
First of all thank you for your continued interest in WebClient. It is
nice to see that people like to use it. However, I'm more than a bit
surprised about what you are saying below about having WebClient in
Pharo
79 matches
Mail list logo
