On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 08:34:32AM +0200, Lucio De Re wrote:
> We just got a mouthful from sl and you about the lack of explanation
> for the state of the various plan 9 "distributions". It all smacks of
> expecting Da Vinci to update the Mona Lisa because somebody would
> prefer a high-rise
On 11/23/19, hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i'm not sure you got sl's philosophy here. of course he will deny i
> do, but here's my interpretation anyway: the public generally seems to
> frown upon technology. people don't even want products any more. all
> they need is a flashy name. a future
On 11/24/19, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>
> The other repos on that site are either user repos run by random people
> who asked me for access, or else various code I've collected around the
> internet and did not want to lose. Some of those repos came from Uriel
> and I never have figured out what they
On Nov 23, 2019, at 9:25 PM, greemngr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I was just curious if it had any chances of coming back or were 9legacy and
> 9front the only options.
Ah. :-) But why? It is just out of idle curiosity, such
as wondering about an old friend you haven't seen in
decades or you
I was just curious if it had any chances of coming back or were 9legacy and
9front the only options.
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tb6b3aefeebeb526d-Mba7731a6c4090275a2d0e91e
Delivery options:
On Nov 21, 2019, at 10:29 PM, greemngr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> The site hasn't been updated since 2014-2015. If it's dead, is there any
> chance of it coming back into development?
Why do you ask? What do you want to do?
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 04:35:25PM -0600, Steven Stallion wrote:
> The upstream version of Mercurial in the 9front ports collection is
> based on my work, not bichued's:
> https://code.9front.org/hg/ports/file/5f994209e142/dev-vcs/mercurial/mkfile
>
That repo is run by 9front users; I just host
It is unfortunate that some believe that being caustic is a prerequisite
for 9front advocacy.
Worse, many 9front advocates become offended by any challenge to claims
they make, while at the same time administering personal insults with ease.
Fixing the fragmentation doesn't come from starting
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 08:24:41 -0600, Steven Stallion wrote:
Against my better judgement...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 08:24:41 -0600, Steven Stallion wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 3:30 AM Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com> wrote:
> > Grow up.
>
> Indeed. It's interesting that folks from 9front
> The amount of work wasn't much
then why bring it up?
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf27e6479d8812712-M9af22cf877937b18fbd1ae40
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
oh. nobody uses that. i wish that stupid ports repo didn't exist :)
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf27e6479d8812712-Mbdaaacbda2d5ec3fe7bf687f
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
The upstream version of Mercurial in the 9front ports collection is
based on my work, not bichued's:
https://code.9front.org/hg/ports/file/5f994209e142/dev-vcs/mercurial/mkfile
The amount of work wasn't much, but if you're going to dredge up
ancient history, at least be accurate:
To follow up, 9front mercurial originated from
/n/sources/contrib/bichued/ in 2009. So this is yet another example of
the complete lack of discoverability being a source of unending
confusion in the Plan 9 community. How many years have people been
pissed off about "stolen work" or whatever
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 08:24:41AM -0600, Steven Stallion wrote:
>
> Indeed. It's interesting that folks from 9front like to tout their
> development as "open" using tools that others in the community have
> developed in addition to their own. To wit, you seem to have gotten
> along quite nicely
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 09:29:14AM +, Richard Miller wrote:
>
> Never mind, I think I can just about see the gist of what you're
> trying to get across. It's meant to be insulting, right?
>
It's meant to be a practical answer. When people come looking for
information, they want to know
imo you should not allow insult by who only tried to insult you in
weakness of feeling insulted by former accused insult.
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf27e6479d8812712-M9337221a8a9b9afc9a111659
Delivery options:
Yeah, WTF.
> On 23 Nov 2019, at 14:16, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
>
>
> I think (hope) this is sarcasm.
>
>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 6:35 AM Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
>> Steve and Richard,
>>
>> You are a bunch of hypocrites. Bitter old men.
>>
>> --
>> Aram Hăvărneanu
>
> 9fans / 9fans / see
On 11/23/19, Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com> wrote:
>> nobody takes any of it seriously because none of them really use
>> plan 9 to do anything people use computers to do
...
> Never mind, I think I can just about see the gist of what you're
> trying to get across. It's meant to be
I think (hope) this is sarcasm.
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 6:35 AM Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
> Steve and Richard,
>
> You are a bunch of hypocrites. Bitter old men.
>
> --
> Aram Hăvărneanu
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
On 11/23/19, Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
> Steve and Richard,
>
> You are a bunch of hypocrites. Bitter old men.
>
Not hypocrites, not bitter. Old, maybe. Nor am I.
One day, Aram, you'll be at the receiving end of criticism or even
ridicule. There is no doubt that you are brilliant, and so are many
Steve and Richard,
You are a bunch of hypocrites. Bitter old men.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf27e6479d8812712-M08bfe720c68d2b835d25e368
Delivery options:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 3:30 AM Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com> wrote:
> Grow up.
Indeed. It's interesting that folks from 9front like to tout their
development as "open" using tools that others in the community have
developed in addition to their own. To wit, you seem to have gotten
along
> nobody takes any of it seriously because none of them really use
> plan 9 to do anything people use computers to do
Ummm, what?
Four instances of universal quantification ("nobody", "any of it",
"none of them", "anything") in a sentence which is not even logically
self-consistent.
Never mind,
23 matches
Mail list logo
