On 18-May-02 07:03:51 Jeroen Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip]
JD> It's more directed to the cabals in Debian. I know a lot of JD> package maintainers are willing to help the Hurd port, but it's JD> made impossible by small group of people who don't want to JD> cooperate. And if you say something about it, it's always your JD> fault and not theirs, because they think that they are holy and JD> don't make mistakes, you are just a fool wasting their time. And JD> that is just the way the Hurd port is treated in Debian. Funny, a good bit of the above sounds like what I got in #hurd And perhaps even elesewhere much closer to the hurd home. But overall this discussion recently seems to be something of an identification of constipation that need a back to basics cure. Egos are a nasty thing that can get in the way alot but the cool thing about the hurd is that it is to allow differences to exist together. The point is, there are alot of very good benefits to be had in gaining freedoms in using the hurd. These benefits need to be better identified and pushed. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't FSF, GNU and GPL all about freedom and don't these stand above debian in the "what is responsible for the existance of the other". Not to mention the Hurd being the official GNU core. Maybe this matter needs a bit of RMS input? When those above you do not listen, then go above them. Or ask yourself if they really are above you, beyond your choice. But back to basics is probably what is really needed as I've seen alot lately that is so disconnected from the basics that it seems to be a trend. I.E. "do you think lying is OK?" is a basic question with a simple yes or no answer but looking at microsofts crap in the courts this is a basic principle that doesn't appear to exist at all anymore. And that is constipation serious. Maybe MS has also infilterated Debian, as they have elsewhere? If debian is really becomming a dictator like organization then how about an option that gets back to the basics of what FSF, GNU and GPL are all about? Certainly there were alot of people who joined Debain based upon such basic principles and who would seek the same now. Anyone for Freedom? Or is this going to become like constantly batteling for your privacy, because the politicians are being bought off by the corporations who want to sell your personal info? A never ending battle? Personally I don't consider constantly batteling, to be a freedom from such time wasting conflictions dis-ease. The Hurd allows for, or is to, choice and co-existance of differences, does it not? Simple answer: Yes or No? >From the Users point of view (be it developer user or newbie end usr and all inbetween): In the Science of Computing (as opposed to the politics of computing) there are three primary user interfaces (not so unlike the having three primary colors from which you can make up all other colors). Nature seems to love "3 primaries". If you remove one of the colors or user interfaces, you greatly restrict what all can be created and done by the user. Those three user interfaces are: The command line (shell prompt), the Graphical User Interface, and the third is the side door "port" that many know in different ways, such as APIs, pipes, etc.. (what has been defined even down to the three basic forms of the third being the passing of a signal semiphor, a message, and a memory address, between active functionality in the system, be it within a program or between programs even across a distributed network.) Having or making all three of these user interfaces available to all users in a reasonable and usable manner is an act of providing freedom. Don't make the mistake of assuming every and all end user don't want the third, for that would be acting in a false authority and judgement of others. It would be very inconsistant with the basic concept of freedom. Alot of developers tend to make that mistake (as a matter of taking "control over others for money and other things"). If this wasn't a hard fact, then the computer industry wouldn be the way it is and there would be no MS vs. DOJ anti-trust case today. To put out any heat being generated by what I just wrote, how would you feel if I stated that there was no point in the Hurd because it's all being done in Linux, or that all the hurd will do is follow linux which only follows Windows, or my saying nobody needs new options beyond linux capabilities...? Do you really want to constrain the primary colors of the rainbow and live in a less colorful world? Or constrain the rainbow of computing? THIS THIRD USER INTERFACE: Not only is this third user interface used to "put things together" but by inherent design, the Hurd is strongly supportive of it, as it makes alot of use of this third user interface. As an end user, I want the three primary user interfaces in an easy to use and reasonable manner, so I can do things, create things for myself. So I can be free to do things as I see fit rather than being constrained by the politics and commercial interest of others. Having these three user interfaces available in a reasonable and useable manner is prerequsite to the development of an autocoding environment. http://www.ai.mit.edu/~gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg01363.html Put another way: Refering to RMS, FSF, GNU and the GPL. Just how far does freedom go if it doesn't include the typical computer end user in a usable and reasonable manner to them? At this point in time, none of these support typical end user freedoms. To reach this goal of genuine computer user freedom, all three user interfaces being available to the typical user is a pre-reqisite. This is where the Hurd comes in. It's why the hurd is important and it needs to be made clear to all those involved in the GNU effort. About the so called "cabals": cabal: 1. a small group of plotters, esp. against a government. 2. the plotting of such a group. 3. a clique This random house dictionary definition sounds like it's talking about morons promoting it's set of constraints via the illision of constraint removal of others. But thru further investigation of this word and it's evolution and variations, it seems that there is some focus around "creation" and the process of it. http://www.ritmanlibrary.nl/kabb37.jpg The cabals don't have the exclusive on cabala. Freedom to create....As I See Fit to do for myself. Isn't this what the All of GNU is supposed to be about? --- *3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!* *~ ~ ~ Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!* Timothy Rue What's *DONE* in all we do? *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE* Email @ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/ ^<--------<----9----<--------< -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
