Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 03/30/17 09:09 PM, Andreas Wacknitz wrote:

+1


Plus one means nothing.
You can share your ideas in-topic , express something you like or 
dislike, share ideas,

but +1 on Trolling response it truly not helping.
What you did "+1" on? On personal bashing instead of staying in topic?


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 03/28/17 03:29 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:


I know the Wiki is a sensitive topic for you but please play nice in 
your answers.

Especially since James' comments are valid.


Bug reports should be put on Bug tracker.
Comments are actually solved by making an account, and witout "flaging" 
on the wiki, that is trolling, but changing articles.


It is important to have nice Wiki, but as I see you apply too many wrong 
assumptions and wrong actions to positively attract people .




If the content is outdated, flag it as such, if it is completely 
irrelevant move it to the archive folder.

Of course discussing such modifications beforehand is appreciated.


"Flag " is form of trolling as time consumed for "flag" is almost equal 
to time needed to read and directly instantly change what is needed.


No flag is needed, nor should be used. One can directly change articles 
and I won't repeat that anymore since it is just obvious you are wrong.


One can say that one Makes content outdated (what exactly is?) simply by 
flagging it and not updating it.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 03/28/17 03:36 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



Nodoby has time for spam or moderation, so after a reality check 
disabling temporarily was the only option.


Obviously, since I mentioned it, someone has the time...
So it is not true that "nobody has the time", since I am here.

I am talking about comments on wiki.



Your attitude is not helpful if you have no constructive alternative 
to offer.


Your deleting is not helpful.


In the meantime I started some clean up during the week-end.


You have been warned not to delete Openindiana users commends,
you are doing it against sense and requests from community to save comments.

I have alternative of saving them and reusing them on some other place 
and at the moment of making new graphical/web place for communication, 
to be able to save OI history and usable info in comments.




A said, deleting content is not contributing and IS destructive.


They are disabled not deleted.


You have no permission to disable commenting, before having alternatives,
having ability to leave comments is much more valuable as an option.

You did the same on site, diabling user comments adn communication,
you are disabling comments on Wiki, you apply filtering people and 
requesting blocking me from communicating and are deleting data even if 
said not to still.


All that when knowing you have a guy to manage them so that you don't 
need to care about that.
So your actions are bad , not requested, against communication of 
people, with false pretends that there is no people willing ho save 
comments and manage them.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 03/25/17 10:53 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



The comment section is now plagued by spam and should be disabled asap.


I don't think it should be disabled since there is no space to save 
comments.

Historically, comments prove to be valid source of information corrections
and eliminating a way of communicating with users and visitors is 
counter productive.


Isolation is not good for the project.
Pulling off user and visitor ability to leave comments is not good for 
the project.
Editing spam and saving comments is not the same as isolationist "idea" 
of destructive turning off commenting.


When it comes to the Wiki and User documentation, we should treat them 
as a priority.
I already started adding development notes but people with knowledge 
of administration should not be afraid to contribute and modify 
content that is obviously outdated.



Hope that is helpful. I have been given access to the wiki and
will try to clean things up as I see them, but there is a
significant amount of duplication across the OI wiki and the
illumos wiki which magnifies the effort required ...


Agreed.


Braging is not hepful.

A said, deleting content is not contributing and IS destructive.
Having way to save comments as valid history and way of communicating 
(as people while reading would like to leave comment and contribute to 
content if not editing it,

iv very valuable option.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 03/25/17 10:27 PM, James Blachly wrote:

I know I am unlikely to sway anyone, but please allow me to offer my 
perspective as a brand new OpenIndiana user (but have already been contributing 
to illumos-gate for the past year) as I think it is very important for any 
project to get “first impressions” from people as first impressions are what 
make or break any project.

So, with that in mind:

The outdated wiki [content],


Please wequest an wiki account and start to edit. DOn't brag on it.


including outdated comments, is a detraction and reflects poorly on the 
project. To be fair, this applies equally to the smartos wiki as well.


Goes the same, apply for some editing and don't brag.


  I almost did not use OpenIndiana at all, but decided to give it a try anyway. 
Luckily, the project itself is far more professional than the impression given 
the wiki.


Again, attacking Wiki won't help, you have anything smart to contribute 
contribute by editing it...



The help offered generously on the mailing lists and IRC has been wonderful and 
reflects very well on the community.

Hope that is helpful.


Not very much. But thanks for comments.


I have been given access to the wiki and will try to clean things up as I see 
them, but there is a significant amount of duplication across the OI wiki and 
the illumos wiki which magnifies the effort required ...


it is normal to have duplicated content, since OI is an distribution and 
illumos is more like 'core' system and kernel.


Your editing will surely be going through reviews, as Wiki is 
cooperative thing, so you won't be alone.

Just to mention, don't try to delete contents on Wiki, but to improve it.
Any deletion under pretend it is duplicated content can be seen as 
destructive.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Dropping java interfaces to Gnome libraries

[Nikola M]

On 02/28/17 11:49 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:

There's a little mess.
I believe that we've never shipped java-gnome, 
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/java-gnome/4.1/ (from 2013).
We shipped only libgnome-java, 
https://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/sources/libgnome-java/2.12/ (from 2007).


Oracle has dropped these libraries (except java-atk-wrapper) at 
2015-12-15, according to solaris-desktop~spec-files Changelog.

I'm inclined to do the same...


Weren't they used for GUI administration panels for 
Opensolaris/Openindiana?,

vpanels?
I have Firewall GUI icon in System>Administration>SystemFirewall  that says:
/usr/bin/java -client -jar /usr/share/vpanels/vpanels-client.jar firewall
It is updated machine.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Dropping java interfaces to Gnome libraries

[Nikola M]

On 02/28/17 09:43 PM, Franklin Ronald wrote:

Hello,

I don't know any real world application that make use of Java-Gnome 
stack.


In official site the latest beta was released on 2013, May.

The most notable Java Desktop applications are written with Swing or 
SWT. If anyone write a java desktop application normally is because 
"portability" (or are completely crazy), and make a glue between Java 
and specific desktop API is nonsense IMHO.


I think that libraries can be dropped.


Still not having exact information for what exact application they are used,
but we now have information that they are maintained last time on 2013 
and some 2015, not 2007..

(Where?)
So still not knowing it's use cases, it is still not the case not pro 
nor contra.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 11:55 PM, Adam Števko wrote:

Hello,

I also support this step. I will be for every solution that helps us 
clean up wiki even more.


"Cleaning up" is not the way, but improving.
Isolationist and disabling policy is hardly welcoming to anyone , 
therefore disabling comments without alternate solution already working 
is a messy idea to say at least.



Seeing outdated comments is bad thing.


It is not a bad thing to have comments per se. It is a good thing .
If it is in the right place it is not the bad thing too.
Maybe someone thinks all comments and form of communication are bad 
thing, but they are not.


I’d rather see people update wiki content or contribute to oi-docs 
(hey, we need you!). If they want to discuss, there are channels for 
that: mailing lists and IRC.


I am not going to react to everything, only to few key things:


You not only want to delete all comments, or selected comments, that 
represent active history of people reactions,
but also want to _disable_ commenting, that is read as alienating people 
from project?




- number of mailing lists - historically, there might have been more 
mailing lists for different sub projects, but it doesn’t make sense


Under your opinion, that historically proved to be false.
It makes sense having teams actually.
Since there are no many people coming in and there are no teams formed.

Closing things one by one hardly can be describe as creating something..


to return to such setup unless we grow


One can't grow , by closing ways of communication, mailing lists, 
commenting and deleting user content.


our contributor base significantly. It isn’t very practical to have 20 
mailing lists


What's wrong with that having many lists??. Do lists frighten you in the 
evening? Is freedom to post to list without control and discuss without 
ability to stop them to discuss problem for your control?

Do they consume some much resources? No.
Being frightened fo many lists is just illogical. (Providing grown up 
person know how to use it's mailing list filters in mail client...)



and only 2-3 people on them. We can use existing lists.


If you continue messing around with things, closing up means of 
communication, hardly will be skyrocketing.

As seen by current 2-list principle, it hardly made any strong move forward.

I actually very much like lists that are per-project, per-team and it 
hardly matters how many people are on it if it is used to

- Do thing in the public
- record activity for later reading
- Communicate freely and conveniently asynchronous on the subjects

- #oi-documentation is not an official IRC channel and any talk 
regarding development, documentation, asking question etc can be done 
in #openindiana / #oi-dev. So, if there is an interest in moving 
documentation forward, please let’s reuse existing channels and not 
fragment the already small community.


As for disabling comments, I think we should set a deadline.


I heard first time of the other one, I added #oi-documentation id to my 
chat list.

I heard that "docs" channel first time in this thread

People are welcome to #oi-documentation to talk about... documentation.
"docs" are not documentation.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 11:06 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



Keeping outdated and incorrect information on an official medium is 
*wrong*.


Those are comments, and owned by their authors and dated.
They are not parts of articles themselves.

If anyone takes a power to select only comments he/she likes, then it's 
not comments who are the problem.


As said it is much harder to manage them on migration if they are moved 
around in random way, before there is the solution for it in place.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 11:14 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com 
<mailto:minik...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 02/25/17 08:41 PM, Andreas Wacknitz wrote:

nikolam, you should check the comments. I have the impression
that a lot of them can be deleted without loosing anything.
You are right to preserve comments with valuable information,
eg. technical discussions.


Selecting what should be preserved or not is changing the history,
a la 1984.
I am sure you are right some comments are more useful then others,
yet they are all just comments.
And even just comments, they are all useful (except spam etc).
They are to be reused so ditching (and even removing ability to
comment) I don't see right atm.


Nothing is ever erased on the internet.
So we put obsolete content in a directory named "Archeology" where you 
could dig for content to bring back the the current Wiki space if it 
is of interest.


it's just not clever way of doing everything. it's Ok to improve 
articles, but burning and re-creating on another place..
it is just easier to know what comments belong to where when it is time 
to migrate them.

If you mess it around like that, then it is pointless.

Any obsolete and incorrect content should be removed from the current 
space: people need *up-to-date* and *reliable* information.


And it is made by editing content and not disabling commenting etc.



Having incorrect information on the official Wiki makes us look like a 
bunch of clowns.


Comments are not wiki content.
Whatever clowns you see..

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 11:14 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com 
<mailto:minik...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 02/25/17 08:41 PM, Andreas Wacknitz wrote:

nikolam, you should check the comments. I have the impression
that a lot of them can be deleted without loosing anything.
You are right to preserve comments with valuable information,
eg. technical discussions.


Selecting what should be preserved or not is changing the history,
a la 1984.
I am sure you are right some comments are more useful then others,
yet they are all just comments.
And even just comments, they are all useful (except spam etc).
They are to be reused so ditching (and even removing ability to
comment) I don't see right atm.


Nothing is ever erased on the internet.
So we put obsolete content in a directory named "Archeology" where you 
could dig for content to bring back the the current Wiki space if it 
is of interest.


it's just not clever way of doing everything. it's Ok to improve 
articles, but burning and re-creating on another place..
it is just easier to know what comments belong to where when it is time 
to migrate them.

If you mess it around like that, then it is pointless.

Any obsolete and incorrect content should be removed from the current 
space: people need *up-to-date* and *reliable* information.


And it is made by editing content and not disabling commenting etc.



Having incorrect information on the official Wiki makes us look like a 
bunch of clowns.


Comments are not wiki content.
Whatever clowns you see..

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 08:41 PM, Andreas Wacknitz wrote:
nikolam, you should check the comments. I have the impression that a 
lot of them can be deleted without loosing anything.
You are right to preserve comments with valuable information, eg. 
technical discussions.


Selecting what should be preserved or not is changing the history, a la 
1984.
I am sure you are right some comments are more useful then others, yet 
they are all just comments.

And even just comments, they are all useful (except spam etc).
They are to be reused so ditching (and even removing ability to comment) 
I don't see right atm.




Nevertheless, the wiki should have a cleanup and in my opinion should 
have a better structure. The ideas and details should
be discussed either in the mailing list or on irc. BTW: it irritates 
me that I am alone on #openindiana-doc for some time now.


I asked for #oi-documentation to be created so I am there since then , 
so you must be on wrong channel. It's unofficial as it could be, so anyway.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 06:51 PM, Thomas Wagner wrote:

Hi,

even if I don't like the content written in a few selected comments,
I would not just disable all without a closer look.

If we find a way to preserve the message of the more valuable
comments, that would be cool. In that case someone would need to
edit the articles and merge in the messages.


Yes, my idea is preserving them during the process of making Web 
representation of the mailing lists (forum-like but not forums but 
mailing lists) and to include and save all messages and topics inside.


It would go together with ability of logging in to web represented 
mailing lists in forum-like style, with people's comments integrated and 
then links on wiki itself to point to them and appropriate topics, so 
people can include themselves with the project more tightly and at the 
same time content is preserver and both fresh one is there.


Thank you all for comments on this matter anyway, it is good to know 
peopel comments are welcome however they are and can be used to make OI 
better (including subject of comments themselves) :).



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 06:25 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



Most discussions are outdated, either irrelevant or incorrect.

That does not make them invaluable.


If nobody cares to reuse them then they are de facto deprecated.


I just said I care to reuse them and history of people's activity is not 
the code to be depricated.


A newcomer may not be able to distinguish what is outdated and what is 
not: keeping information that is inconsistent is dangerous.


That is not the reason to delete history and as said I woudl like to 
save them.


Keeping people's contributions is more then important to show that 
distribution is alive for a longer time.
Only thing dangerous is not using a head to think and people are more 
then capable to distingush between comments and articles actually.




Discussions happen on IRC or the ML, no need for duplicates.
We could argue about the lack of forums but in any case the
Wiki is not one.


Deleting them just like that without saving and a plan to
incorporate them in other ways would be a blow to their freedom to
post them in a first place.


If nobody stepped up, in the past three years that we have been 
talking about it, to process them then it means that nobody cared 
enough to devise such plan.


You are wrong and you can't judge just like that,
I just said I have a plan to reuse them and not let them be deleted. 
that sounds like stepping up and caring already.


If you choose to just ignore what I said, whatever, just point is don't 
destroy people's comments. Just not yet.





I have an idea of integrating them (and on-site comments) into
newly made mailing list integration with forum-like representation
of it. So I would need them all.


Then let us back them up.

Please do not destroy comments for now.
You expressed idea for deleting them, I thank you for your deleting ide 
but let them be here for now to be able to manage them more easily in 
the process I described.





Bare in mind that any way people contact and are active, is a good
way and shutting down means of communication is not positive by
any means.


Better do one thing right than several wrong.


Deleting content is always wrong.



Besides, if you take a look at public forums, they also include
all previous old messages, and no one asks just like that, to
remove them and why should?


Because a wiki is not a forum and enabling this feature was a mistake 
in the first place.


I agree, yet same as comments on site that is the path people take to 
leave some trace of their interest and existance.
Tens of times, comments were going to the right direction and ended up 
changing wiki article in a positive manner.


So not only they represent traces of time of people's interest and 
willingnes of contribution,
we need to have a valid replacements, links, and alternate system for 
leaving comments and to think about that.
Deleting, removing and revoking functionality is just too much aggresive 
at the moment,

taking into account I politely asking you not to.



OI also had much more mailing lists in the past but someone
unonimously shut them down, like:



They are useless when the number of mailing-lists exceeds the number 
of users.


That is your idea, they are not useless at all.
They are there to provide organizing infrastructure and having 
infrastructure is prerequisite of organizing, like you have a web site 
first and have a content on it afterwards.




Power to destroy is ,someone say,  power over something, but power
of reusing and creation is much bigger power, so no to 'just
deleting' people's comments at the present time...


I agree with this but if nobody reuses them and the situation leads to 
inconsistency I'd rather get consistency over quantity.


Ok, as said, not to be removed at present time nor commenting disabled,
because there could be people still wanting to comment and discuss,
there comes the time to reuse them and integrate discussions into new 
platform,

since we still not have new platform with mailing list integrations,.
removing peope's ability to comment and comments itself foes against 
freedom of expression, history of communication and ability to comment.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wiki comments

[Nikola M]

On 02/25/17 05:43 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:

Hi,
could we disable comments on the wiki and remove all the existing ones.


Existing ones should be saved and reused not just deleted...
Beside there are good info in them, thez are activity traces no to be 
part from so easy.



Most discussions are outdated, either irrelevant or incorrect.

That does not make them invaluable.


Discussions happen on IRC or the ML, no need for duplicates.
We could argue about the lack of forums but in any case the Wiki is 
not one.


Deleting them just like that without saving and a plan to incorporate 
them in other ways would be a blow to their freedom to post them in a 
first place.


I have an idea of integrating them (and on-site comments) into newly 
made mailing list integration with forum-like representation of it. So I 
would need them all.


Bare in mind that any way people contact and are active, is a good way 
and shutting down means of communication is not positive by any means.


Besides, if you take a look at public forums, they also include all 
previous old messages, and no one asks just like that, to remove them 
and why should?


OI also had much more mailing lists in the past but someone unonimously 
shut them down, like:


oi-dev - existing
oi-infra
oi-bugs-team
oi-Caiman-team
oi-G11-team
oi-Jds-team
oi-NewDevs
oi-Pkg-team
oi-Sfw-team
oi-Userland-team
oi-Xnv-team
oiac-discuss
openindiana-announce - existing but not send to, because no official 
releases

openindiana-discuss   - existing
Pkgbuild-announce

And instead of groups and organization, we have disorganization and few 
people around. Not saying it is connected as such directly, but...


Power to destroy is ,someone say,  power over something, but power of 
reusing and creation is much bigger power, so no to 'just deleting' 
people's comments at the present time...



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] FOSDEM 2017 hackathon

[Nikola M]

On 01/19/17 09:55 AM, Adam Števko wrote:

Hello,

as you all know FOSDEM 2017 is organized during the first weekend in February, 
which is almost in two weeks' time. There will be a gathering of almost all OI 
developers.

We will have 2 days of time available for hacking and discussions. I would like 
us to make the maximum use of this time and leverage the fact that there will 
be a huge presence of OI developers to work on projects that will benefit from 
having all these people available literally next to you.
For that reason, I would like to do some small planning in advance, so we know 
what projects we will be able to finish during this time / move *significantly* 
forward. I would like us to avoid working on projects, which are one man's work 
(those can be done anytime).

I would also like to encourage people, who are not attending FOSDEM and will be 
available during that time to engage. With more people, we are able to do more 
things!

I would also like to hear your feedback on this and propose projects, which you 
think should be finished / worked on. Also, if you need access to more build 
resources, please let me know in advance. I might have one spare VM for builds 
/ testing.

For myself, I know that Jim and I will be working on the build system.

I would also like this thread to stay on topic.
With good organization, we are able to deliver good results.


So the question is who actually will be physically at FOSDEM?
And who is coming virtually? :)


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wikipedia page

[Nikola M]

On 12/15/16 01:47 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:

On 12/13/2016 04:19 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:

Hi,
I updated the graph I made a while ago on EN and FR (+ link to release
notes):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenIndiana



Wikipedia is based on quoting sources other then article topic itself.
Editing Wikipedia pages by the same people that are actively involved in 
companies and/or contributing projects can be viewed as self-promotion 
and is usually sanctioned on Wikipedia.


That mostly goes to the way the text of articles that are being edited
and in a way that for every single edit, one must provide quote or 
source and the text itself must not be of a promotional type.
That said, it is best not to self-edit Wikipedia pages and leave that to 
others, plus fixing inaccuracies  got to make sure not to insert 
other/new inaccuracies in a positive intent,

but with consequences editable by the Whole world, in the case of Wikipedia.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Wikipedia page

[Nikola M]

On 12/13/16 10:19 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:

Hi,
I updated the graph I made a while ago on EN and FR (+ link to release 
notes):


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenIndiana

Feel free to update the other languages.


Except from the fact that OI hipster snapshts are not releases per se..
That is why they are called snapshots and not releases.
There is a reason for that and not only choice of a word.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] HEADS UP: /dev images are archived

[Nikola M]

On 11/26/16 03:03 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I moved all /dev and old OpenSolaris isos under archive directory
> at http://dlc.openindiana.org/isos/archive/. This change is going to
> be propagated to mirrors after they sync.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam

-Do you think that there is the room for linking something like
hipster-current link to latest ISOs and images for Openindiana hipster
snapshots,
so that people won't get lost in big large list of hipster snapshot images.

And/or to have all images/files of one snapshot inside it's folder.

-On another topic, about 'entire' state of packages on OI hipster snapshots:
I urge on considering keeping in OI publisher, 'entire' package state
of at least one previous and latest current OI hipster snapshot (ISO),
so to make more easy and predictable updates from previous hipster installs.

Deleting 'entire' state of latest current OI hipster snapshot can result
in unupdatable installs until potential bugs with updating are fixed in
newest hipster, if ever.

'Rolling release' is nothing if there is not some kind of 'release' and
still closest to that are OI hipster snapshots, so keeping it's 'entire'
state for at least 2 latest snapshots or so is minimum for upgrade path.

I also don't understand any reasoning fo keeping /dev repository
untouched and not updated,
when there is alsmost clear upgrade path from old /dev over
/hipster-2015 (that should stay there for upgrade path for consideralbe
time too) toward newest /hipster.
That is also the reason why keeping package state of at least 2 OI
hipster snapshots is needed, to ensure upgrade path regarding /dev old
installs too.

I think it is truly reasonable to prepare, and do landing of previously
tested  hipster snapshots, into /dev repository, firstly as upgrade from
/dev to hipster-2015 and then to catch the train with hipster snapshots,
so that at the end it remains on the same track, with both /dev and
/hipster updated at it's own different pace.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] USB installation instructions

[Nikola M]

On 11/14/16 07:16 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Hello,
> the download page points to the following instructions which are outdated:
>
> https://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Installing+OpenIndiana
>
> Maybe we should have reviewed the installation instructions
> beforehand, this is a bit unfortunate :S
>
> What is the plan? Pointing to OI Docs or updating the Wiki?

Plan is if you know the procedure and you used it and confirmed it works,
it is just click away to edit Wiki article..



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] USB installation instructions

[Nikola M]

On 11/15/16 02:27 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
> On 11/14/2016 01:16 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>> Hello,
>> the download page points to the following instructions which are
>> outdated:
>>
>> https://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Installing+OpenIndiana
>>
>> Maybe we should have reviewed the installation instructions beforehand,
>> this is a bit unfortunate :S
>>
>> What is the plan? Pointing to OI Docs or updating the Wiki?
>>
>> Aurelien
>
> Unfortunate indeed. For several months the procedure to write USB
> sticks has changed (for Windows and Linux/Unix).
>
> I say let's just link the download site to oi-docs.
>
> http://docs.openindiana.org/handbook/getting-started/#creating-a-bootable-openindiana-usb-flash-drive
>

Oi-docs site is not the Wiki.

Wiki is free to edit for everyone, choosing not to edit it but to point
to oi'docs is not democratic.
>
> While the oi-docs site may be incomplete and has over the past couple
> of months lagged behind Hipster a bit, it's still mostly correct in
> regard to creating bootable media.
>
> And if it isn't, well 'Patches are welcome'.

So you can edit Wiki instead.

>
> Michael
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Call for contributors: New OpenIndiana documentation

[Nikola M]

On 11/ 4/16 03:31 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> After severals months of Michael’s hard work, we are glad to present a future 
> basis for new OpenIndiana documentation. The documentation can be found at 
> http://docs.openindiana.org. 
>
> Michael tried to make the contribution barrier as low as possible, so here 
> are couple of things:
>
> • Documentation fixes/additions/removals all leverage the Github pull 
> request (PR) system.
> • Every PR is automatically built and the result of each build is marked 
> in the PR menu. With this, you will know in a matter of minutes whether the 
> change you made is mergeable and satisfies our checks.
> • After a PR is merged, the change is automatically built and deployed to 
> http://docs.openindiana.org
>
> To begin contributing, the process is described in great detail at 
> http://docs.openindiana.org/contrib/getting-started/. Contributing directly 
> from OI is fully supported (either follow steps in the guide or "pkg install 
> mkdocs"). You may also contribute from non-OI operating systems. 

First of all I recognize positive and altogether nicely put announcement
text , so I would also ask that points that I would be reflecting to and
putting light on (enev if possibly not putted in so nicely) be seen with
an equal amount of positivity.
Reporting bugs and problems and discussing them is the normal thing and
one won't work without another. :)

"At this point a member of the OpenIndiana Project docs team will review
your changes."
- This is what I was actually afraid of. Nothing goes past check of
those who actually wrote it and mandate what stays in it and don't? So I
don't suppose changes will be easy to go through.

Real docs  are actually not suppose to be easy to go through with
changes without review, yet I don't get any info who actually reviewed
current articles in preparation before launching it.

I think I am pretty much well equipped myself to review them actually so
I am here available for that.

"Hosted by the OpenIndiana Documentation Team."
I don't understand why docs site is not  part of openindina.org styling,
and represented as separate site.
What is the so called 'docs team' that is supposedly 'hosting'
Openindiana site (shouldn't openindiana site be hosted by openindiana
itself and not third party?)

Actually that site looks like replacing many contents of Openindian.org
site itself, too so I am pretty much fully confused of the need for it's
existence in such form.
Many parts of it looks better fitting on openindiana.org site itself and
Wiki (or are just repeating the contents), while truly some of it is
better left on separate place.
So I recommend for www.openindiana.org site integration, both with style
and look and feel and to distingush that not everything that comes to
the mind has a place to be put in Documentation, but on Wiki.

One don't need to learn nor use Git nor make accounts on separate sites,
if using Openindiana Wiki.
Another problem is actually depending on Github and organizing hierarchy
of "pasting issue" there instead on openindiana infrastructure,
therefore creating separate managerial structure and Github is also not
available to all the countries in the world.

I think most of these issues could be resolved by doing things more in
public, on mailing list in preparation, development, planning and
working period,
instead of using private mailing lists, private consultations and
surfacing with what seems unchangeable "already decided" things.

> I would also like to warn people that you still have to consider this project 
> as work in progress and it does not serve as Wiki replacement. The longterm 
> plan of this project is to serve as the end user documentation and fulfill a 
> role within the OI community much as the FreeBSD handbook does for the 
> FreeBSD community. 
> The OpenIndiana wiki has a lot of content, but a huge amount of it is 
> outdated and not relevant any more. However, this will be solved in the 
> future by doing another call for participants. Notes related to the 
> OpenIndiana development are to stay on our wiki in the future.

You can't decide what stays or leaves Wiki by yourself, that is the
process of many people.
I ask not to cannibalize it's content, but to contribute to it.
I agree on other stands about one not being replacement for another and
vice-versa.

> Those who have used the FreeBSD handbook will know what I’m talking about. 

FreBSD is competitive OS with different non-copyleft philosophy. Anyone
liking FreeBSD is free to use it, Oi is not FreeBSD. I consider not
looking over the fence as the possibility of doing things better then
anyone else.
OI does not depend on FreeBSD, not even for the philosophy including
rolling-release model.

If anyone thinks that Docs are easy to be "rolled released" that is
conflicting with what Documentation is.
Documentation is refreshed and can relate to the release and Openindiana
currently does not have releases to 

Re: [oi-dev] mkdocs and oi-docs

[Nikola M]

On 10/17/16 02:49 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> while the other PR is still worked on (WIP) and not ready for merge - just a 
> preview for the curious as to what 

I just won't call it WIP if it is presented to be merged. (About texts)
It can be merged in any RND moment , similar as not knowing in advance
when things gets merged in illumos ( :) )


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Lithuanian OpenIndiana users / developers

[Nikola M]

On 09/22/16 09:53 PM, Мартин Бохниг via oi-dev wrote:
> Those freaks are still spamming my mail account with Illumos-devel
> list messages.
> If that's not terror, what else is it?

I think that could be seen as a form of appreciation.  Maybe could be
looked at it like that.
:)


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Lithuanian OpenIndiana users / developers

[Nikola M]

On 09/21/16 09:16 PM, Мартин Бохниг via oi-dev wrote:
> For what it is worth: Although they at Illumos promised that they
> allegedly "banned me", they still keep bombarding my old email address
> with all of their list traffic, although they of course prevent me
> from responding.

Hi,
I use Mail filters :)

I am subscribe to like 50 mailing lists in Thunderbird and no sweat.
(not that I read all of them all the time obviously :) )
Tools>Message Filters or directly 'Message Filters' from Thunderbid menu
on the right.
I use filtering by aether 'List-ID' or 'From' fields and every mailing
list has it's own folder.

It is also per mail provider/server if it let user also receive
'bounced' messages (your own messages sent to list that are also sent on
the list and to you. For example Gmail does not do that, so to stay in
line with thread, one needs to copy it's own sent mails to the list to
it's own folder so to see who aswered to whom. Other providers I think
does not do that, mostly.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Apache OpenOffice retirement - all contributors fled to LibreOffice after Oracle Sun takeover Fwd: Broken components

[Nikola M]

On 09/ 9/16 10:40 PM, Lionel Cons wrote:
>
> No, the problems in the Openoffice community are there since 2-3
> years, not there is no "vice president for open source" at Oracle or
> any one who steers against such long term developments.

Since Oracle gave it to Apache foundation, it's not anymore connected
with Oracle.
Putting it in the context is further making things not visible.

Free software and Open source is an development model, separate from
business plans in general.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Apache OpenOffice retirement - all contributors fled to LibreOffice after Oracle Sun takeover Fwd: Broken components

[Nikola M]

On 09/ 9/16 11:00 PM, Lionel Cons wrote:
> On 9 September 2016 at 22:55, Alan Coopersmith
>  wrote:
>
>> Yes, Oracle killed the product, got out of the office suite market, laid off
>> the team, and instead of leaving the code to rot, donated it to Apache.  It
>> wasn't trying to grow a community, just let the community have a chance to
>> continue without it.
> Well, the community fled to Libreoffice instead.

I think this is mostly pulled out of other mailing list context, where
they represent actual internal discussion
and using it out of that context, it screams on FUD.

Milions and milions of Apache Open Office downloads through the months
and years and every day today,
spell different story, of well behaved and mature product.

Similar attacks have already been coming from LibreOffice fanboy base.
Other then that, Oracle did the right thing with Apache Open Office.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] HEADS UP: HTTPS available on pkg.openindiana.org

[Nikola M]

On 08/13/16 08:47 PM, Reginald Beardsley via oi-dev wrote:
> Could you describe the actual problem?  Are there browsers that can't use 
> https and are actually useable?
>
> I tried http://www.opendindiana.org and it seamlessly switched over to https. 
>  So what is broken?

You described it.
In practice maybe someone would like to still have an option opening
http site and not be forced into https.
http also uses less CPU power to manage requests then https, etc. Even
if redirection works.

I generally never got that 'all https' thing, even forcing https can
help getting site contents as it is, without possibility of interfering
on delivery.  I got used to see https as optional and on login,edit
pages etc, but it may be that differences between http and https in CPU
use are small enough, even some major pages with large visit numbers
continue to use http (like Ebay) possibly for exactly less CPU/server
use and also legacy clients (set top boxes , older phones with older
cyphers/certificates etc.)

Also, someone opening site without 'www' would maybe like opening it
instead being transferred to www site where is it now. Actually
openindiana.org used to work since recently, without being redirected to
www.openindiana.org, that also changed.
It's worth mentioning, those are noticeable changes.
Anyway with 'all https', at least login and edit pages are encrypted.

Noticable, dlc.openindiana.org does not work with https, even optionally.
Actually don't think it's a problem, but only if Hash (.sha256sum) files
or hash numbers are available from https location/site, so one can
safely get sha256sum and check with sha256sum -c *.sha256sum after
download, or have .sha256sum files signed with GPG/PGP key.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] HEADS UP: HTTPS available on pkg.openindiana.org

[Nikola M]

On 08/ 9/16 06:49 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I gave our infrastructure some love and have following announcements:
>
> - HTTPS availability

As I remember https was turned on some month ago, but turned off and
turned on again now.
Just to mention,
there is currently no solution for a problem that https is now forced
and redirected
with no http access anymore to openindiana.org web site and
openindiana.org redirects to www.openindiana.org.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/26/16 12:47 AM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> If I can explain another/a last time: there is no censorship as you were 
> asked to put your draft alongside the original proposal, kept for reference.
> There will be one final Code of Conduct but there can be several strains to 
> serve as basis, as you were unhappy with Adam and Michael's formulation.

This is not true, because there is only one on the site because you are
afraid to have another on site.

> In this frame we have an open process were different options can be analyzed.

Yet there is the only one option is on site and liked to Wiki..

> By modifying the document in-place you deny people the right to formulate a 
> proposal: 

And Xenol(Adam) modified document again on site and in-place today and
you don't react..

> this type of censorship is exactly what you stand against, this seems a bit 
> counter-intuitive on your part.

Censorship has many forms, like supporting creation of pages by one and
forbidding and gagging another.


And by the way I just received another threatening e-mail from Xenol,
threatening to cut me off from the mailing list.

So that is how things will be doing form now on folks:
if you are against fascist texts made by makruger, xenol will gag you
and send threats.
No escape form trolling, because it is systematically supported.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/25/16 12:01 PM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
> Dear Nikola!
>
>
>> I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
> [...]
>
>> On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing, importand 
>> and
>> capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and misuse, the minute it 
>> gets
>> to real community dealings.
> The same thing could be said about you.  

Well, am not the one who misuse power. and it surely can not be said. I
am not a fascist.

> Please relax, calm down, and
> do some other things for a few days.  Nobody wants to forbid you from
> stating your opinion, but the way you do it, and the way you attack
> people personally, 

You say untrue things.
I all the time talk about document and problems in it.

And there is myriad of trolling answers or those who reply +1 -1 with
out any clue.

> is very exhausting.

Yes and having fascist manifesto and misuse in the document on OI site
is not a problem?

> Just imagine what someone else might feel when he reads your emails
> describing him *before* you send it.  Words like "dumb", "misuse",
> and "fascist" are really not appropriate in this discussion.

It truly is.

> From reading this list, on IRC, and looking at commits, I know that you
> are a smart and motivated long-time contributur to OI.  Please listen to
> the rest of us when we ask you to relax a bit.

Yes, let's relax things a bit.

I proposed to putt that horrifying thing off the OI site, but no fascist
manifesto is there by power.
I also edited the site TWICE , trying to explain the differences
and i am not going to do anymore it is enough it was reverted twice.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/25/16 02:00 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I restored the copy on different wiki subpage, so people are able to
> see it: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals
>

Instead of reading this fascist BS, you can visit:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

(Don't worry , xenol probably won't "warn" or threaten you by reading it,
that I couldn't say if you edit he's fascist document.)

Adam, you again misused your web site access to point to the fascist
manifesto.

It's a progress, you don't threat anymore for editing your writing, you
just use a power, like a real dictator to confuse and make people feel
stupid.

If anyone can explain, what this fascist and imprecisely misusing and
misleading thing is this:
If anyone who "likes" this stupidity of writing, can confirm waht
exactly he/she likes in this for raping and segregating WITHOUT ANY
RULES, all the people for personal likings, he/she can say that now
after reading this:

>
> What will not be tolerated:
>
>   * Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality,
> religion, age or physical disability.
>   * Open hostility, and or abusive language.
>   * Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.
>   * Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, or participate
> in a pattern of behavior which could be considered harassment.
>   * Filibustering – (replying with negative or opposing viewpoints to
> every post in a mailing list thread).
>

It is precisely written to facilitate trolling and misuse.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,

I just received threats from Adam in the form of "warning",
where he threatens me by forbidding contribution, limiting and deleting
accounts and showing in general total not understanding how Wiki works
and that no one seeks approval to write articles if having account.

Over this incident I can only realize that Adam is not at all material
for a leader in this community, for not having community integration
capabilities and that having a position of managing infrastructure of OI
he is starting to misuse he's powers trying to mandate things.

On personal level, it hurts more to recognize that long-standing,
importand and capable guy like Adam, makes so much of mistakes and
misuse, the minute it gets to real community dealings. Since this test
have not been passed without aggressive action, I fully question ability
of doing public work.
 


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/25/16 10:09 AM, Bart Coddens wrote:
> Please Nikola,
>
> Take your bike out and go for a ride in the countryside.
> This everlasting tirade/rant does not help the community or yourself.
> Just my 2c,

This mesage of yours is off-topic and presents personal trolling.

Ine does not need CPE/CoC to act upon trolling , it is when you take out
of the topic and personally attack people, that is Btw included in
proposed edited text under
"Participate while on topic, with personal remarks being not on topic at
all times.".

If you have something to add on topic, regarding text and what and why
you think should be there,
you can contribute by being on-topic. (Just saying "yes" or "no" simply
does not count for intelligent people.

And yes, I have a bike and i ride, yet that is not the topic.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 08:59 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I added draft of proposed CoC to wiki here: 
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals

Firstly, there are no "code of conducts" there is one document (that
can't be even make active any time soon, but whatever).
Second, xenol have been changing article name that already includes it's
name and reference to it's calling it already.

> I modified the Wiki entry to contain both versions.

That is not good behaviour . If you have so different ideas (that
includes fascist dictatorship), you can make a new one.

Plus it is one document to be working on, not multiple.
I explained it on wiki changes comments.

> Modified version of initial CoC text contains following changes:
>
> - added to "Core principles and expectations:” part:
>
> • Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
>   • Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
> contributions.
>   • Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.

This part is rephrased and included in the text in a shorter way. See
wiki page logs(history).

>   • And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
> others to live by.

This can be part of another 'bona fide' document again if having enough
talent to put it on paper.
it again works around 'time' resource where it could be careful not to
require much of a people in the start, their interests will follow them
further in.

> • Be open and transparent so others can participate on an equal footing and 
> contribute to the project in their own way.
>   • Everyone has something to contribute.

This already exists in text , also redacted to be shorted and more
easily readable.
But I included all it's points.
My redaction does not repeat "We we" but puts verb as action in the
beginning of the sentences, that seems more reasonable to me.

> - added to “What will not be tolerated:” part:
>
> Discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, sexuality, religion, age 
> or physical disability.

Thi is horrible and is already covered in "No personal witch hunt, based
on anything toward a person(s)."
where "anything" encompass all mentioned things already.

Listing some of them would provde endless calls to add more one the list
and also discussing on those terms as topics can provide boisterously
off-topic. So better say, no personal things, period.

> - “Reporting violations” part was changed:
>   • Violations of the CoC should be reported to the distribution 
> maintainers via ab...@openindiana.org.

This mail address can't be used for other purposes because historically
it is used for reporting SPAM form mail to mail server administrators.
Reusing it for something else can give save heaven to trolls and disrupt
SPAM reporting process.

There is no need to have "violations" and also there is no need to have
centralized place or a guy that mandates everything, like put here.

There are no additional right nor reason to give to "distribution
maintainers", because all that sh* job of dealing woth the community in
general distracts of more important work.

Also one persons or few of them can't mandate everything within
community, so no reason to centralize, plus it is not good thing to
"mandate all communication channels" in one place, that is plainly wrong
and can stop people forming projects and groups advancing parts, and
that is not usable as a result.

>   • Neither reporters nor reported persons will, or should be, 
> made public.

This is clearly wrong. Perons need to have "guts" to come in public.
Inducing secrecy in operating things is disastrous to open projects.
If one want to take part in open project, one should act in open giving
ability to other to contribute.
No private witch hunts, as already stated.
Witch-hunting  is very bad and inducing it in this way, in secret is
very bad and can only help trolls.

>   • Upon receipt of a problem report, 

There is NO problem(s) regarding CPE (CoC).
Because there ar no "policing officers" everything can be put to the
wide community to work things out, before even reaching any need for
action, there are numerous ways of modifying and educating (plus givint
the time, remember) before doing something aggressive like proposed here.

> the distribution maintainers will investigate the issue and determine whether 
> it warrants further action. Any further action will be proportional to the 
> severity of the problem.

No. There are no "distribution maintainers".
There are some roles, workings, voluntary obligations and active people
within community.

There can not be  "elite" that mandates, without registered active
members and body made out of it.

So Adam, whatever you are doing with this document here, it CAN not give
yourself more power, there could be active community membership forming
and it can take some time,
but you can't mandate anything in the community, by the force of 

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 05:40 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> It is only democratic to pull the plug out of that page, showing that
> unfunished undemocratic documents like that should not have democratic
> support at all, promoting autoritarian rula and forcing it.
>
> Other then that, democratic way could be having links on that page
> pointing to Wiki so people can contribute there, but I choosed to have
> both of them presented concurrently, old useless one and newer rewriting
> of it.
> If work occurs on the Wiki then it is natural to point to it.

But it is not natural to have stale and bad  old version of it on site
for no reason.

Plus xenol yesterday changed on-Wiki article name, that is not done on
existing articles.
Also xenol received reccomendations on how to edit Wiki in a right way.

Only problem with it is that those "not to be tolerated" parts of
proposal are idiotic
and can't be glued into document, for not being precise and pushing
community into one-man slavery.

>
>>
>> So xenol does not have right to PUT it on the site unilaterally.
>>
>> And I have ALL right to change and rephrase and contribute improved
>> version as I did on wiki.
> You have the right to setup a workspace but modifying website content is 
> subject to review.

Great, xenol modified website without public review. Deal with it first.

>
>> Plus I have rights on site to change documents, so why not I use them to
>> change?
> Because the rule on the website is: do not modify existing content without 
> acknowledgement and review.

It also goes for NEW documents putting on site, or you have choosen to
turn blind eye to mandating things and protecting bad things on site,
but to forbid changes.

I agree site is not a wiki, like I already said, but it is only obvious
you are not using your own rules like you describe.

>
>> Xenol used it's right to change, by putting it, I don't see the
>> difference here.
> Adam created new content, you modified existing content. 

And that is great to do.

Ok, then On Wiki, I created the content and he is modifyoing existing
content.

I don't thing people should be forbidden to modify existing content.

>> People tend to even say things without even looking,
>> and it is obvious that pushing document on the site is avoiding any
>> procedure and community effort and that is bad behaviour that tend to
>> spread.
>> As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.
>>
>> You can of course do whatever you want, it's always your free choice.
> Do you consider that the group of active developers steering the project 
> misbehave by proposing a form of organisation to help OpenIndiana move 
> forward?

Of course they do. Plus they propose that trolling is the norm in this
community, obviously facilitated by makruger idea of ruling.

I say everyone do what knows best that proposed document is clearly full
of logical and inhumane intentional mistakes that are to destroy this
community in the long run.

Just take alook at the actual changes and refer on them and be on topic.

> The need of a Code of Conduct was discussed within the group, ideas emerged 
> and are thus proposed to the community.
> Sounds pretty reasonable to me. :)

No it is never discussed before in open, before making this topic,
anywhere, not even on IRC.

If it is done in secrecy, that is grouse misbehaviour.
As I see there is no comunity but xenol pushing it on site and some
trolling content in it.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 08:53 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
>
> Yes, the wider context exists. The idea is to make every possible step
> to move project out of decline.

As I see it there is not decline and in the opposite OI hipster is in
the best shape in years and getting many new contributions every day.

> There are few more things current developer have in the pipeline: 
>   - CoC (debated now),

It's not even called like that, and it can't be used before other things.
it can come active after making active community members and bodies, not
before.

>   - governing board elections,

There can be no any elections before there is active member community
formed and that is a process that can take up to a year.

>   - mission statement update,

That could exist even before, regularly it should come after all of
previous but for the sake of advancement, can be made, like the Roadmap
already exists and can be expanded.

So it seems it is all in somewhat different order, beginning with active
member community formation.

>   - new end-user documentation (based on Michael’s work),

Those big and wide articles, created by him, are not in the shape to be
called documents.
Texts are non audited, and full of badly shaped wording.

They haven't been checked through on-Wiki contribution process and they
are not by any means documents of Openindiana.
Also there is nothing "new" with them, whole handbook idea is pulled
from OI Wiki and there are all those nice articles already.

poll you started awhile ago can't be used to mandate it, because it
lacks registration and anyone could enter data in it. rigging results.

>   - oi-userland changes and further simplifications to lower barrier
> for contributing. There will be a call for new package contributions,

With thing you say here, you are out of topic and you better put them
somewhere on your personal blog.

>   - new ways to try out and develop OI (vagrant boxes, qcow2 images
> and netboot.xyz integration),
>   - some infrastructure work (wiki update, long needed cleanup and
> reorganization, infra reinstall and better coverage via more mirrors),

>   - forum, so people can communicate and help each other (it seems
> that mailing lists and IRC channels are not sufficient),

This is a terrible idea if it is not linked to existing mailing list.
if is great idea if it is linked and exchange messages with existing
mailing list, it is great thing.
If linked, that can elevate from the need of maintaining separate usernames,
plus "centralized" one-site forums are monolithic and do not provide any
democracy in it,
since they are goverened by one man, top-down, allow deleting of
messages, like they never existed,
large misuse of accounts, etc.
So not great idea if not linked to existing mailing list.

>   - stable version based on hipster (/dev -> /stable will be a
> seamless transition. So far, plain upgrade works, but zones complicate
> it a little bit and that has to be sorted out).

/stable is nice to hear but I am not sure if you have idea what it means.

I proposed for old /dev to new /dev transition, where new /dev can be
refreshed from /hipster from time to time.
That could work, but /stable?.. That can come after number of new /dev
releases but not sure if it can be called like that any time soon,
because there needs to be at least several people dedicated to
maintaining it and breakages in it needs even more testing and support
then landing into new /dev .
So maybe smartest thing woudl be to land into new, refreshed /dev form
/hipster and let people try out regular pushes to it over at least one
year, before thinking of /stable.

> There is a lot of work to be done, but unless we can get more
> developers on board, not everything can be accomplished in reasonable
> time. With stable release, we might need a few more devs, who could
> fill the ranks and help with maintenance. So I hope that the order of
> steps is logical and reasonable to everybody. To be clear, some things
> are already happening (mostly technical related). Political ones are a
> matter of discussion of course and shall be discussed and further
> agreed. The idea is to come up with some proposal, which could be
> discussed.

I hope you wouldn't recommend as leader for the whole distribution.
I think you are not ready for it. You just don't listen good enough and
tend to ignore important things.
For all other things, including operational things you already do
managing infrastructure, ok.

>
> This list is very brief and I could write a blog post detailing every
> point if interested. However, it will take me a few days. Just let me
> know if you want to have it in more details or enough information was
> provided.

You better write it on your private blog, anyway.
It could be separated into projects but make sure to consult before
trying to put it on the roadmap.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 08:20 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hi Till,
>
> I added slightly modified draft to 
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Code+of+Conduct+proposals and it contains the 
> sentence you wanted, but slightly modified and expanded:

Please don't change name of the document when editing it, for existing
Wiki page.
It is named:
Core principles and expectations have "(Code of Conduct)" in it and that
is satisfying the need to refer to it by the other acronym.

>
> Always seek to maintain a welcoming environment for new contributors.
>   • Welcome new people to the project and guide them in their 
> contributions.
>   • Give them the time you were given when you first joined the community.
>   • And if you weren't given enough time please set a new example for 
> others to live by.

These changes have been integrated into existing newest text , changing
several wording in it.
They are mostly already covered and  there is no need to have sub-dots
because it looks confusing.
Things can be as short as possible for better understanding.

> Modifications come from former OSOL CoC. I hope you like this even better.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam

It is not ideal as an idea.
Pople like to use their free time as they like and free time is
important resource and asking them to devote more time at the first
sight is a big requirement.
I added similar wording that is much shorter and recommends the same
(Give more time then received)

If anyone mention Opensolaris similar document , it says "Be Inclusive"
and that is important message. Being inclusive turns off policing.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 04:34 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Bottom line is: you do not modify *existing* content without prior discussion.

Neither adding NEW documents nor editing should go without discussion
In this case new page was added out of blue and it denied changing it
nad ther IS ongoin discussion on this list and that can held as that
here IS discussion as it is.
And people deserve to see changed document.

> I reverted it to the state it should be.

It surely is not in a state it should be..
 ..not your revering has a meaning, but contributing to it's contents has.
But if that is how you define it as protecting of random changes, I
won't change it no more as said.

> Now discuss with people, agree on what should be on the Wiki and what should 
> be on the Website, then we change the website page accordingly, does it not 
> sound democratic ? ;)

I exactly changed web page to the current state of the things on Wiki,
calling on being on topic and talk about text itself, and that is
actually working and people talk and contribute with questions, answers
and ideas.

It is only democratic to pull the plug out of that page, showing that
unfunished undemocratic documents like that should not have democratic
support at all, promoting autoritarian rula and forcing it.

Other then that, democratic way could be having links on that page
pointing to Wiki so people can contribute there, but I choosed to have
both of them presented concurrently, old useless one and newer rewriting
of it.

Rules are broken by putting that document on site in the first place, so
deal with it however you want i showed how I dealt with it.

> Putting the draft on the website 

Drafts should absolutely not be on the official website!
That is misuse of term draft and of the website. People expect finished
agreed and supported things on the site.
Maybe on sub-site where is expected to have various things in private
spaces etc.

> may not have been the best solution but this is just a draft (hence 
> "Proposed") 

Putting one word before "mandated" and forced document, doesn't makes
things any better, it is even obvious that it is mocking to viewers,
where minimal effort is needed to _force_ it by removing it.
It is again how dictatorships work, having always worst case scenario
ready and presented.

> and at least it is visible and easy to read.
And is is grous misuse of community, let me not repeat myself..
So it is visible, but updated one is not supposed to be visible..

> In any case you have no right to decide to modify this document unilateraly, 
> so:

So xenol does not have right to PUT it on the site unilaterally.

And I have ALL right to change and rephrase and contribute improved
version as I did on wiki.

Plus I have rights on site to change documents, so why not I use them to
change?
Xenol used it's right to change, by putting it, I don't see the
difference here.

I just used my rights on site to change it , I already had and I also
made an effort to show differences in plainsight and put links and
explanations.

I have all rights, I logged in I changed it I discussed fully before it,
I haven't received any valid reasons not to, and it is still discussed upon.

> - we work on the drafts on the wiki with original version and your changes 
> presented on one page each.

That is obviously in the work, only think missing is that that bad
document of xenol is still on the site, frozen.

> - Adam and Michael took your comment about the publication to the Wordpress 
> into account into account, let them respond and we then modify the page 
> accordingly.

They are not elected in this community on any position,
Adfam and Michael do not rule in this community and I have no need to
wait for any of them for any decision, not only including this document.

Document can't be mandated by them nor put in force without proper
procedures,
and any future web site changes xenol will try to pushg in (like "docs")
site, putting out broken 'poll' "results woithout user registration etc.
are void.

At the top of that, no one can mandate and forbid to people to talk
discuss and contribute how they see fit or to stop changes.
This document precisely gags people form discussing and having basic
human freedoms, therefore putting it back online without notice that
hings ar emoving on forward put whole community in a wrong picture.

> - the website stays off topic  until we reach the final version of the 
> document.
>
> Is it OK ?

No it is not, because freezing that fascist document on site, pushes
people to believe that "power" over infrastructure is important here and
that "powerfull" can stop anyone else doing the right thing.
People tend to even say things without even looking,
and it is obvious that pushing document on the site is avoiding any
procedure and community effort and that is bad behaviour that tend to
spread.
As long it is there site is under occupation from that troll document.

You can of course do whatever you want, it's always your 

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/24/16 02:00 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> Web page
>>>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>>>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing 
>>>> and
>>>> contribution to the text.
>>> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
>>> first and asking for review when applicable.
>> Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
>> better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.
> That's a good point but the discussion could have taken place without
> all the drama,

Drama is created when it is posted on site without any previous
discussion, like mandating it.

Since it is posted by one guy and the other guy requested to be on site,
it is only natural to be able to change it then,
instead that would be mandating and forcing it as it is now, forced to
be on site unchanged.

> In any case it does not justify hijacking and modifying the page on the 
> website.

I hujacked nothing, I have a rights on site to change pages, and I used
that right to do a good thing and show that it is not dictatorship and
that we have right to change it and have a right to not accept dictatorship.

> Since you create a work space on the Wiki I leave to Adam and Michael
> to decide what they want to do with the website page.

They are not by any mean pointed by noone to mandate things in Openindiana.

And especially make such obviously anti community documents.

> In any case, reverting the page without notice should not have happened again.

And you just did revert it , twice...

> As you do not seem to agree, you will have to go through moderation on
> the website until we sort out the Code of Conduct discussions

I have put my head on the plate to make Openindiana better  and since
you reverted it back , twice, i have no intentions fo doing it anymore.
It is enough for me that I protested by putting changed document for
everyone to see and if you insist that it remains unchanged for no
apparent reason, I can't change it forever.

People watching page can think that is OI document and surely OI is not
fascist dictatorship supported by trolls, like presented in that document.

It is important to stress and be remembered that I did everything in my
abilities to turn attention to such bad practice, bad behavior of trying
to mandate community documents with fascist utopia,
and put site contents with such an important document online, without
community approval and prior dissicussion , and that is what Adam
(Xenol) did.

So violation is on xenol side and if anyone hijacked site it is xenol.

Defending non-discussed web site posting by forbidding that it can be
changed for something less fascist is by definition hijacking the site
and disrupting community process and as it is shown, it is not me.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Web page
>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
>> contribution to the text.
> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
> first and asking for review when applicable.

Putting information that there is community process instead of fascist
autocracy presented in unchanged document is important.

Aether non-fascist document on site or presenting there is the process I
think it is fair to see that there are differences.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/23/16 01:11 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Web page
>> http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
>> have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing and
>> contribution to the text.
> A page should not be modified without discussing with its authors
> first and asking for review when applicable.

Page should not be pushed on site, before discussing and making it
better in the first place, before it ended up on Site.

This is very important document and I SHOULD be changed on Wiki.
Pushing it on site and making appearance of not changeable at this
stage, can hurt community for a long time and it represents noticeable
exception.

Plus "author" of important OI documents is the community, so it must be
changing.

This is core OI document and respectfully it sends wrong information to
the people that it is already carved in the stone, so mistake was
putting it on the site in the first place.

> Reworking two versions of Code of Conduct on the Wiki 

There are nor ever could be "2 versions" There is One OI and there is
absolutely need for that.

Simply, negative parts in previous incarnations are fixed, everyone free
to contribute.

> is a good idea

No it is not good idea, because it leads to fragmentation.
There is this topic to put more ideas here and Wiki too, there is more
then enough ways to contribute to it.

> and I am positive about such process if both versions are presented
> for comparison and discussion.

Again there are NO  conflicting . Thre is one working document, and
there is Wiki.
If it was thought the better way before pushing it at first place,
things would go more smoothly till now.
There are only reasoning and reasons that counts.

Plus document can't be made active, before creating active community
membership and OI body that can make it official..

>
>> Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
>> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
>>
>> Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
>> or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.
>
> However I will revert now the website page to the original version

Ok, I will revert it back to the new version, that explains that that
fascist part of the document have been fixed.

You are free to do whatever you want, but telling people that there is
no working document and supporting destroying of user and human rights.

There is the reason why there is posted in a changed way.
And please dont' rever it to anything, until it is changed on Wiki.


> since the modification occurred without any consultation.

Also putting it on site occurred without any public consultation and
revision process..

Now you have public information.

> History being preserved you will be able to copy/paste from it if needed
Aether remove it from site (some people already said they want to be
there seen)
or there is current page on it.

Putting old document on site have no benefits, nor supporting clear
fascist tendencies in it.

> Every time I created a user account on OpenIndiana's WordPress, I
> explained that the informal rule is: ask for review and do not modify

Yes, xenol didn't follow this rule, when putting he's document on site.
if just appeared without public discussion for such important thing.
Then since that rule is broken butting on it does not apply for it.

I warned before that "Site is not wiki" ,
and I am fully ashamed to even see such fascist document on site, so
aether change it to current one, or remove it form site.

> existing content without discussing with original authors. Let us keep
> it that way.

Let's not.
Because this is most important thing in OI community right now.
and reverting changes back would make problems alive again, that Adam's
document made dispensary.

If you want to contribute, do it on WIKI, then you can refresh it on
site, like i painfully did.

That fascist thing will not be on site.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/23/16 11:31 AM, Michael Schuster wrote:
> I'd add
>   c. People make mistakes. :-)

That is right, that is why people's personalities are not in the focus
point and they can change over time.
It is expected to make mistakes, all the time, even software makes
mistakes not only people :P

If everything moves through more brains it is more probable that someone
would notice a bug/s in a reasoning etc :)


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/23/16 11:27 AM, Peter Tribble wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com
> <mailto:minik...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On 07/22/16 02:00 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
>> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right
>> length, as well.
> What are you actually happy with?
>
>
> I'm happy with the original document that Adam posted, with the caveat
> that I
> think the reporting mechanism can and should be tightened.
>  
>
> I can say I could be happy with the first affirmative part, that
> is from the time of original posting changed, but not the second
> part with restrictions and secrecy.
>
> Have you seen working version at:
> http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
> because document is edited in open, not in closed and on Wiki
> instead on the site.
>
>
> Indeed I have. Your modified version is flawed in the following ways:

I hope I explained in good words why changed version is much better, I
thank you for contribution and please add more if you want more things
to add etc.

>
> 1. The title has been changed. "Code of Conduct" is the normal term,
> use it if that's what is intended

Normal term is what we choose to use.
We have SMF, for example and that is "normal term" for us, so we have a
freedom to call it how ever we want. So there is no "normal" term at
all. is using Linux "normal", then what we are doing here then? We can
differ and will.
So we can choose whatever wanting, and I have put "Core Principles and
Expectations", because it more suits the need, beter explains use and
contents and yes, it is "different" from the rest of the world that is
"normal" and using Linux...
Of course if someone thinks web page link could be differently named or
also putting it by another, more known name, too, it can be done, but
no, we don't have to be "the same".
Oi already have myriad of differently named terms that use similar but
not the same thing as other systems.
We need to have a space to inovate including out own terminology and
meaning of it etc.

> 2. It conflates operational procedures and etiquette with conduct.
> (There may be
> a place for a "how we operate" document; this is not it.)

That is right. Good that you mention it.
Core Principles and Expectations (CPE) (or CoC) is there for community,
as general showing fo values that can be used to benefit community en
large, precisely avoiding unneeded restrictions, wording that could turn
people away or even managerial parts.

Actually when having good text there that makes managerial (operating)
document(s) much easier to organize and puts less work on shoulders of
operating people on all levels.
Separate documents can describe operations, yes and there is no room for
pushing them into this document.

Actually, CPE provides good environment and positive attitude stating
values. It is unfortunate actually to even mention any procedures in it,
but they are mostly relaxed for operations to have less work to do and
that EVERY community member, even not yet member of some working group
or active member, can use CPE to operate communication in most positive
way right ahead.

> 3. It does not make clear what is not tolerated (the list Adam gave
> covers the
> problems we see much more accurately)

There is absolutely need for such harsh wording in Openindiana
community, nor turning against people.
_Everything is tolerated_, if it does not conflict with Core Principles
and Expectations.
And it is very easy to find out if something conflicts, comparing with CPE.

As things are best to be growing organically, they are much better as
gaining more experience, also people react much better to positive and
supporting principles and create healthy environment.

It is obvious that as put firstly, "nontoleration" part is turned
against itself, too and (forgive me if I am repeating myself) whole that
nontoleration section is Trolling heaven and can't come back.

Nontoleration and exclusiveness can't mix with toleration, inclusiveness
and OI community. Just seeing "non tolerable" part in text induces wrong
feeling that contributing is all about power. It is not, it is about
principles.

> 4. It does not provide a mechanism to manage violations. Such a mechanism
> should be confidential. (Confidential, not secret.) Why?

Of course it provides it. For starter there are NO 'violations' as term
so no need to manage them.
Hence, less chance to even have any problem.

'Discouraged behavior' part should actually not be needed, and document
can function nicely without it, but it mentions few things.

And 'Managing misuse escalation' is what you are looking for.
It separates that channels of communications can have somewhat d

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/23/16 06:01 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 07/21/16 07:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>> Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
>> on OI people.
>
>> Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
>> using a brain at all.
>
> So everyone who disagrees with you is a brainless fascist and that's why
> you've unilaterally decided to ignore all of their opnions and replace
> the
> webpage they'd reached consensus on with yours that has no other support?

You mistake word "everyone and second, do not use 'you' in right context
and thirdly it's about topic not people.

Everyone needs to have some good reason to have an opinion.
If there is not good reason to support or not support something or even
not having opinion, how much that message counts then or what is
supposed to be thinking about?

At least providing reasons or explanations why something one thinks ,
can help value it and improve and represents contribution. Othewise it's
meaningless to just say 'yeah right' not even thinging about something.

> You do realize that sort of anti-social, disruptive, obstructionist
> behavior is exactly why this was proposed and continuing to act that
> way is just convincing more and more people the original proposal is
> necessary to allow people to work on OI without having to have these
> horrible fights all the time that just chase people away?
>
> -alan-

MOST anti social and disruptive thig in this topic is trying to put talk
about people insted of topic.

We have here a tryout to put THAT antisocial behaviour in the core of
openindiana , by selecting battle agains PEOPLE instead of topics.

I already told you that is trolling and also parts of Adam's published
'code are injecting the same trolling into community as a norm.

I call for valid reasons for ANYTHING , if there are not vlaid reasons,
one better get some or not waste a time.

I already told you, alanc all this and you make same mistake again.

There is not any fight, but what you make it, people NEED to discuss and
some fascist ideas about gagging it and putting 'power' in the centre won.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.

Hello all,

Web page
http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/
have been updated with the latest on-Wiki version with links for editing
and contribution to the text.

Latest document revision, free to edit is on:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

Feel free to further contribute to the document writing process on Wiki
or feel free to express wanted changes as a part of discussion.

Thank you for contributing to Openindiana community documents.

>
> We would also like to point out this draft document is open to
> discussion and acceptance by the community.
> Our desire is for the discussion to be civil and for it to center
> around the verbiage of the Code of Conduct.
> We do not wish for the discussion to go off topic, or question the
> need for such a document.
>
> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few replies as
> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of this document.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam
>
>
> ___
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev@openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/22/16 02:00 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
> Overall, I'm happy with most of this. It's about the right length, as
> well.

What are you actually happy with? I can say I could be happy with the
first affirmative part, that is from the time of original posting
changed, but not the second part with restrictions and secrecy.

Have you seen working version at:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
because document is edited in open, not in closed and on Wiki instead on
the site.

You should not seen document put on site by Adam, as something finished
and not even what will ever be used (and also can't be used because it
is conflicting with Openindiana organizing principles of inclusive
environment, that are still active)

On-site proposed version have not been reviewed before putting on the
site and includes non-precise section in the works, that it fixed in the
working version:

>
> Discouraged behavior :
>
>   * No personal witch hunt, based on anything toward a person(s).
>   * Advocating unsubscribing, other person removal, restrictions,
> filtering or personal negative public announcements.
>   * Not recognizing critique as the source of inspiration to make
> Openindiana better.
>

instead of:
>
>
> What will not be tolerated:
>
Because that section by itself is against it's own terms and actively
works against open development by limiting freedom of speech, freedom of
expression, freedom of contribution, induces negativity, and puts
EXCLUDING individuals on reasons only know to "ruling guy" (and in
secret!) instead of inclusive community that Openindiana started with
and still is.
Working against people and not discussing and fixing issues, presents
form of trolling.
Working against people and not topics it form of trolling.

> I think you need an explicit reporting mechanism. Something like
> "email ab...@openindiana.org "

Nothing can be reported, because there is no one elected to be reported
things to.
It would be against community principles to silently and secretly create
plots against people in Openindiana.
Document can't be activated because there is no governing body elected
in OI,
it can't be elected because there is no formed active community members
group.
There is no forming active members community group, because 'poll'
posted by Adam misused the chance to register and include new people in
the community.

There are several steps needed to fulfill before such document can be
mandated:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Website+Ideas

> or the like. (Of course, you need that to be routed somewhere.) And
> the first statement about
> confidentiality means that the 2nd part about not being made public is
> redundant. There's also
> no mention of consequences.

That is because in open community there is no need for consequences
because community is supposed to be self-regulated and not governed by
self-appointed  rulers.
As presented in managing section:

>
> Managing misuse escalation:
>
>   * Point new and existing community members to Openindiana principles
> and expectations.
>   * Inform and message community members to self-regulate it's own
> behavior.
>   * If you feel needed, consult others about ways of accepting new and
> modifying existing behavior of community members.
>   * If you find it important, contact IRC Channel operators, Mailing
> list administrator, Web site maintainer, Wiki editor and Project
> maintainer.
>
there is very long way to go till it ends up considered misusing.

Do you propose OI main functioning principle to be fear of consequences,
if fulfilling desires of ruling  individual. That is very bad
environment to work with and does not support freedom of expression and
is in general antihuman oriented and there is need for
community-facilitating in a positive and inclusive way.

Original proposed text in it's negative part, actually does not care
about community, people and having more contributors in.
It is non-precise and can be badly misused like that and rotates about
battling people instead of topics..
And actually, turning all organising priciple into a man-hunt, it
represent for of trolling, injected into code of conduct itself.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/22/16 06:23 AM, Glenn Holmer wrote:
> On 07/21/2016 09:47 PM, Nikola M wrote:
>> All "groups of selected people" are selected based on functions to be
>> doing, not selected by the "people" (!)

Just to notice, there is a mistake in the text here, made for rush and
not being a natural speaker.

It supposed to say that it is what abilities of people in a term of
expertise and good doing, counts
 and that topics and ideas counts, but that personal per-person
preferences are wrong.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/21/16 06:32 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Nikola M wrote:
>>
>> You can change it further,
>> but the whole point is you can't know what you want if you don't even
>> look at things that are wrong with the current one. It is regarding
>> whole section for "retributals"/tirany-inspired/not tolerable unprecise
>> part.
>
> I see no problems with lack of precision as long as there are trusted
> people (sufficiently empowered) 

That is exactly what is wrong with it. And what is wrong with judgment.
One can not induce level of uncertainty and obvious have such wide terms
that induce and require tyranny as the norm.
As already explained, it puts "power" in the focus and battle for it,
instead of reasoning and discussing in a sane way over real topics.

> identified in advance who communicate amongst themselves 

This is the second problematic part, it suppose creating cast of rulers
who battle with "power" in between, further taking it apart, just
because some preciseness and unneeded wording injected here.
All "not tolerable" part is injected there to induce in toleration and
not understanding as a norm and that is the pinnacle of trolling. If
everything depends on judgment, then there is no resaon for it to be
written.
Tyranny as a norm - not today.

I am telling being not tolerable toward those spreading non-tolerance
and fascism is good cause.

> when there is a claimed problem 

So it is secretly, without any rules, put in a hand of few, who battle
in between and with the rest fo the people, so it is made in focus over
battling people and not talking about ideas. It sounds like fascist
manifesto/troll heaven to me.

> and come to a decision based on the facts at hand.  

Decision require having rules or at least guidances (and needed ones are
very short), not personal judgment.

Also if person/persons pushing such precise and negative part, do not
see clear problems that are intentionally created by but not really
clear mind, that are created for OI to tare it apart, how to trust a guy
that is so short-sigthed to "rule"??? "Making decisions in hand"  sounds
to me like trolling manifesto injected into OI.

Plus it is put on site like god-given and it can not be used at all
without governing board and members to elect it.
Or someone really thinking that fascist autocracy is a good thing to try
on OI people.

Core Principles and Expectations is there to say something positive to
people and provide guidance, not to enable ruling with the iron fist it
is all wrong to induce governing rules inside COMMUNITY document, that
have nothing to do with statue, operating principles, managerial things,
etc.
That whole section is a product of not very sane and short-sighted
"reasoning".

> This small group of selected people 

All "groups of selected people" are selected based on functions to be
doing, not selected by the "people" (!)
You are mixing community standards with ruling class fascism.
Democracy and community are going hand in hand, what you are proposing
and supporting in answers is a monstrous regime.

> then act like a judicial panel.  It is impossible to foresee every
> circumstance. 

That is exactly why it is so bad, it is a juvenile look at community
standards.

"Problems" that such bad wording is suppose to "solve" are non-existant,
induced and are based on twisting of the reality and painting it black
to facilitate imposter's goals. making problems, so to be able to say
that there are any problems to be solved by "the iron fist".
First creating nonexisting problems and personal power battle and then
solving them with the tyranny if what fascists do.

Actually, using one half of the brain to see the myriad of future
problems it induces is not that hard, using second half of the brain to
actually turn off justice and democracy and actual humanity is what is
very hard.
Intentionally not seeing any problems in it induces the question of
using a brain at all.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/21/16 03:19 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> I did not have enough spare time to read all the words that you wrote
> but upon re-reading various proposals I am

Take your time, there are no various proposals, but only one spawned
from the original one.
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953

You can change it further,
but the whole point is you can't know what you want if you don't even
look at things that are wrong with the current one. It is regarding
whole section for "retributals"/tirany-inspired/not tolerable unprecise
part.

It is not the contents of minfull/mindless support or not, it is the
question wether you understand what is said or not.
If you don't even know what you are supporting, why supporting?

Obviously topic here is about contributing changes, editing and makin
git better, answering yes/no is meaningless.
There's wiki to contribute to it's not read-only web site.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/21/16 04:08 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
> Hello Johan,
>
> I'm sorry you view the adoption of a Code of Conduct as a slippery
> slope leading to an endless set of rules and regulations. And to
> anyone else feeling this way you have my sympathies as well.
>
> In my view I see the project is at a turning point and as Adam
> recently pointed out, the current situation is untenable and problematic.

Situation is not problematic at all. what makes you say that?
let's defuse this balloon for a second , being inflated with no reason.

>
> On many occasions I have heard people vocalize their frustrations
> regarding the inability to get anything done in a public venue. As a
> relatively new member of this community I have often felt that way
> myself.

There is nothing exact like that here explained, but just personal
feelings and personal feelings are putting conversation down on to
personal level.

>
> I have also seen individual community members try to single handily
> address problematic behaviors by pointing them out in the hope that by
> doing so, the problematic behaviors would cease.
>
> Each time this occurred, the individual community members gave up in
> frustration. In fact, in a most recent incident, the individual
> community member characterized the remedial exercise as 'rolling a
> large rock up the hill".

There is nothing like that sentence I can find at the moment, so dunno
what you are talking about. What incident??

> As a community, we shouldn't expect each individual community member
> to have to fight this battle themselves, rather I think it should be
> done collectively. The adoption of a sensible CoC helps to achieve that.

It is your problem that you see yourself as being waging a battle
instead of working with others.

>
> I am sure what everyone wants here is a supportive and inclusive work
> environment where collectively we can do some really neat things.
>
> But if the work environment is hostile or dysfunctional, and we as a
> community ignore the issues by allowing the behavioral problems to
> continue without any collective action, then it seems to me we are
> effectively telling the community:

Only dysfunctional behavioral problem I see here, is trying to subdue
all community to minority rule for no apparent reason.
And problem not looking at the text that has issues, but just talking
about it indefinitely...

> "Yes, we have some problems, just try ignore them the best you can and
> not become discouraged and leave as a result of them".

Actually not talking about any exact issue nor a problem, but trying to
solve any future issue, only with governing? How solving everything with
governing is called?

> Frankly I get enough of that in my day job. And I don't feel I should
> have to deal with it while volunteering for an open source project.
>
> In light of this, it's pretty clear we're not going to please everyone
> no matter what direction the project takes. The community may loose
> members either way.

So don't try to replicate your own problems into Openindiana community,
but making problems with dysfunctional operation procedures (secrecy)
and broad sentences bringing more problems.

> Therefore, I see the adoption of a code of conduct as a sensible step
> towards sound project governance, 

It is done in different order to be functional, not rule can be imposed
before creating body that is elected form the people.

It is more important What is inside a document, so actual topic is not
pro et contra,
it is dealing with things in presented text instead.

> which will in the end produce a well managed and supportive work
> environment for all community members.

There is no "magical stick" that will produce that.
There is already very a nice working environment and all benefits and
abilities that can be used to do great things in OI.
It is important to say that it is simply not true that in OI it is hard
to achieve things, at all.
Actually it is easy to achive things, if your 'thing' is for the benefit
ofr the OI.

>
> I do hope you'll reconsider and remain with the community.

Well, I suppose he can do whatever he wants, but painting OI in black
tones, will not help him .


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/21/16 02:31 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
>
>
> Just as the formulation of a mission statement, road map, and a core
> governance team help to show the community and world we aren't just
> aimlessly trudging on in some unknown direction, the CoC is simply
> another tool to provide structure and governance to the project. It's
> goal is to help unite the community under common goals, aspirations,
> and in this particular case, 'working conditions'.

Take a look at provided evolved text here:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=31391953=5=1

Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (CoC) is not statue
nor it's role is to provide 'structure and governance'. Not everything
rotates over power. At the end of the day, people can be asked, and
politely, to think in a certain way, can not be forced into it.

Governance and power should not be the issue in a working community,
only dysfunctional elements need power and see power as important thing,
chasing new rules as a vessel to achieving power as a goal and not
something else.

It is symptomatic that injecting false and bad and broad rules into
community, and actually not talking about rules text themselves, nor
discussing them, can not be looked at as positive behavior, but as
intentionally dragging all things along, without actual interest on
benefits of them but power to begin with.

Rules in a community as stated should not rotate over excluding people,
but over better ways of including them, facilitating growth, not
destruction, and that is more important then policing any possibly 'bad'
one, with all problems related to actually enforcing power over people.
Proposed "not tolerated" part, being wide and easy to misuse, with
"cutting down" narrow-looking principle can't work in present state of OI.

Maybe most important things I would liek to point out are:
- Putting things on site without discussing it first is bad behavior
- Misusing public opinion without making sure it is not rigged (poll) is
a bad behaviour.
- Activating "Core principles and expectations"/"CoC" without previously
having governing body is not possible.
- Having governing body without firstly having named active community
members to elect it, is not possible.
Having poisonous rules is worst thing that could happen to one community.
It is better to avoid future problems then to make a new ones instead.


Why these parts are bad and unacceptable by themselves:

> What will not be tolerated:

Section name imposes that there are those who are asked to police others
and are in the position to segregate people into those those tolerated
or not. It is there as said to induce "fear and strength" into bystander
and not to provide positive look into community.


> Open hostility, and or abusive language.

These terms are so broad that they are easily misused. Open hostility
can't be defined as and exact term (toward what, how to recognize it
opens pandora's box of misinterpretations.
"Abusive language" also means nothing at all, because any language
people use, if it is on topic and can explain what people want to say is
acceptble in widest terms. Not everyone express their thoughts in the
sam manner, maybe sometimes, someone swear or something, but not being
able to identify exactly what this sentence is about, does help not
seeng it is useless.

> Repeated complaining (rehashing) of closed (decided) issues.

This again opens presumption that there is some "higher being" knowing
everything at any time and that "complaining" is a problem.
Subset of complaining is a bug reporting. Or subset of bug reporting is
complaining. If one enters same problem or a bug day after day, and
others enter the same problem it is only positive to hear complaining.

What are closed issues? In a working community there is no putting
things under carpet. Again, calling that omnipotent power who by itself
knows what issues should be closed and what issues should be not? Again
it imposes ruling one against everyone else who "decides" and carve
things into stone, when exact opposite is needed, to be flexible and
evolving.

> Participants who disrupt the collaborative space, 

Again not defining anything, but entering more broad things like "you
have spit on the sidewalk, you are disrupting collaborative space" or
"you dont' wear pink unicorn t-shirt like everyone else, you disrupt
collaborative space", "you post too much messages/code/text/ideas, you
disrupt collaborative space" and so on..
Please DO disrupt collaborative space at all times, by being active and
sharing with people.

> or participate in a pattern of behavior which could be considered
> harassment.

Again, loose terms meaning nothing: "you posted same sentence twice. you
posted same sentence twice " - you have pattern behaviour, on the
cross/fire with him/her!
"Consider harassment" is again not only broad but also very bad to
include, 

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/21/16 12:13 AM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hi Till, > >> On Jul 20, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Till Wegmüller
 wrote: >> >> On 18.07.2016 23:35, Adam Števko
wrote: >>> >>> Please compose your thoughts and comment with as few
replies as >>> necessary so the community may solidify the final text of
this document. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adam >>> >> >> Hi Adam, Hi Nikola >>
>> Thanks both of you for the work put into this. >> >> Here are my
thought and comments: >> When reading Adams text it refers to a body of
Leadership. Both source Projects (FreeBSD and FiFo) have such a Role
defined. Do we have that? > > Not anything official right now. Every
decision was made by one of the contributors and we tried to reach a
consensus. If the decision was too important, project contributors
consulted those topics with various people and tried to do their best.
However, most things were mostly technical and not political. Unless
leader steps up or different governing body is found, there isn’t
anything. The deciding comes as a part of moving the project forward.

Deciding comes from the public, not private sessions.

> > > I have also discussed this topic with Alexander today and we both
concluded that we has just killed the time with it. We are small
developer community, (mostly) nice to each other and try to help. I also
think that every contributor has found his place within a project
already. If any proposal came from me, I’d just make the present
situation official, but there are certainly drawbacks to it.

If you can't figure it out, then let other people do it. It is not
expected from two of you to figure out everything, just accept not
everyone is good at everything.

> > >> Adams text is more worded towards being a set of rules. Nikolas
more in the sense of expectations. I prefer expectations. > > Problem
with expectations in Nikola’s list is that majority of them are already
in practice and the situation is out of hands.

What situation??

> > >> When I read the words "will not be tolerated" it imediatly raises
the question what will hapen if i break those? Who punshes and how? In
my opinion "Discouraged behaviour" is the better wording. > > The point
of using “strong” words is to show that we take it seriously.

Rules can't be broken if they are written in such way that no one
actually understand what they represent and that is the whole "Not
tolerated" section is alike.
Let "Not tolerated" section be not tolerated itself, fully.

> If rules are broken, the situation is going to be handled privately to avoid 
> any (more) drama on the mailing list and ensure that the problem is solved. 
> And who punishes? The CoC states that distribution maintainers are the one to 
> do so. We can change it as it is a draft. Perhaps, somebody could volunteer. 
> I can assure you that nobody wants to do it and behave like a teacher in the 
> kinder garden. Fortunately, the community hadn’t had to solve any serious 
> issues and there weren’t any > The whole idea behind the code of conduct is 
> to show the community
and the outside world that we are a community of people, who don’t
tolerate toxic people. There are multiple problems with such people,
most present in OI: > > - community members are unsubscribing from the
list - there has been too much drama in the past few months and it needs
to be stopped. Nobody wants to deal with toxic people. You could see one
example right in this email thread. > - public debates - many things are
debated in the private because people want to work on the project and
have something done. If you send out an email to oi-dev mailing list,
the email is quickly going to hijacked or made off-topic. Who has the
energy to deal with it every time? > > With CoC in place, we can simply
show the potential new users and also those, who unsubscribed that
situation changed and that we mean it seriously. After all, everybody
wants to have a peaceful and enjoyable time while using/developing OI. >
However, that can’t be reached while toxic people are present. > >
Cheers, > Adam

I think that by calling people toxic it is what is making toxic environment.
Adam, please stop saying bad words about people in general on this list..

OI is inclusive community as defined when created.
Making it exclusive, totalitarian, ruled by the iron fist is what can
not be defendable by any means.

If we are living in 1984 novel world, I would consider such anti human
look at the things, but we do not.
Inventing "enemies" even if there are none is cold-war type of
thinking.  Warning on results of oppression is not.

We are on the verge of the cliff here, where publicly speaking is
considered not needed and discussing is considered negative and doing
things secretly, policing and giving people sense of fear should not be
the norm.

Someone wanting to lead, should not oppress.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/20/16 12:19 PM, Johan S wrote:
>
> and the future will certainly go this way rule #3137 violates rule #2169
> you're right , i fork from now...
Hi,
I would take this as your contribution toward things you like or not.
We (me, you and everyone) are actually, actively changing the future as
we speak :)

Just to mention, private actions are considered not on topic, like
announcing private 'filters' and un/subscriptions is considered disruptive.

Forking is welcome, please inform us how you are advancing with your
fork, where is it hosted and contribute more.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/19/16 07:15 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
>> And actualy 'not be tolerable' is NOT in a sense of OI community.
>
> http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html - see fallacy #1.
> http://www.slideshare.net/dberkholz/assholes-are-killing-your-project
> https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/team-geek/9781449329839/ch04.html
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F-3E8pyjFo

Links are OK, I 'll take a look at their opinions, thanks.
But links themselves do not contribute to actually changing proposed text.

>
>> I don't know for anyone's inspiration, but it is not needed here to
>> mention
>> direct competition in a way that we are not part of FreeBSD nor ever
>> will be,
>> unless all BSDs accept copyleft licensing/CDDL .
>
> Crediting sources is a cornerstone of open source.  And if you view
> BSD projects
> as competition instead of potential allies, you'll make it harder to
> get other
> projects to support OI - people from different distros often have to
> work together, and in both X11 & GNOME, I've been grateful for
> cooperation with BSD
> maintainers in helping get non-Linux support issues resolved to
> benefit both
> the BSDish and Solarish OS'es.

Yes, but sucking up is not included.

Being independent it most important at least something needs to be
original. not just copied over.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/18/16 11:35 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.

Hello,
I posted updated revision of  "Openindiana Core Principles and
Expectations - CPE" (Code of Conduct)
on http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953
(WIP* Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of
Conduct) under:
OpenIndiana Community Hub
<http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/oi/OpenIndiana+Community+Hub> >
Getting Involved
<http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/oi/Getting+Involved> > Website
Ideas <http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/oi/Website+Ideas>  > WIP*
Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of Conduct)
<http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953>

It comes from the perspective that it is more important to have positive
attitude and community process in resolving (if any) issues, then
mandate (secretive) police work and vague "language" related descriptions.
It is much more relaxed as a text, providing by itself better
environment for people.
It is also named "Core Principles and Expectations", because we as OI
are not by any means forced to be the same like any other free software
distro.

Please recognize the need that OI Principles/Expectations (CPE/CoC) can
not be made "just like that",
but require forming of Openindiana governing body , that also require
registering named community members etc.
(http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Website+Ideas)

I would also like to say that OI website is not a Wiki and that WIP
articles should not be posted on site directly, without review and other
processes.
if you want to make an article please do it on Wiki first, otherwise it
could be seen as pushing it to the site without any civil rules.

Also, (Adam Števko, others) please do NOT cross-post mailing list
messages (e.g. posting both on oi-dev and openindiana-discuss in same
message). It is already explained that is from ML perspective a bit rude
behavior and not very usefull, regarding problems with bounced messages
(on some mail services it gets presented only once so it is not visible
on more then one mailing list and also posting should differentiate the
targeted public).

Here is the updated text (refer to Wiki for newest):
If you have anything to add, change or else, please do comment.


  WIP* Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code of
  Conduct)
  <http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=31391953>

  * Added by Nikola M. <http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/%7Enikolam>,
last edited by Nikola M.
<http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/%7Enikolam> on Jul 20, 2016
 (view change

<http://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/diffpages.action?pageId=31391953=31391972>)



This document is not by any means official Openindiana core principles
and expectations (Code of Conduct).  It Serves as a draft for editing
and discussing.
Mandating Code of conduct, requires OI governing body.
OI governing body requires creating it by delegated members of community.
Delegated members of community requires having registered active OI
community members.

Once presented from Openindiana governing body, Openindiana core
principles and expectations (Code of Conduct) can provide community
guidelines, supporting productive, respectful and collaborative
environment for any person contributing to the Openindiana.
Feel free to discuss changes under this mailing list topic:
http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2016-July/thread.html#4504


  **Proposed** Openindiana Core Principles and Expectations - CPE (Code
  of Conduct)

You should use them at the times as the community member, including
community-defined communication channels (Mailing lists, IRC, submitted
patches, commit comments, etc.).


Core principles and expectations for Openindiana contributors and
community members:

  * Respect and appreciate people's work, time, and effort.
  * Tolerate the right to have different views.
  * Recognize that your public actions determine the public perception
of the project.
  * Participate while on topic, with personal remarks being not on topic
at all times.
  * Interpret the words and actions of others, always assuming good
intentions and providing good intentions.
  * Learn from others, be positive and teach others what you have learned.
  * Ask the community for confirmation of your actions and conclusions.
  * Do everything in open, discuss anything.
  * Contribute in all ways you can to make Openindiana better.
  * Maintain welcoming environment for new contributors and guide th

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/19/16 02:26 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
>
>
> As part of a larger effort at providing a more formal governance
> structure for the OpenIndiana project, I’d like to announce on the
> behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
>
>
> Looks reasonable to me.

That's because you are not seeing enough in the future.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Code of Conduct

[Nikola M]

On 07/19/16 12:05 PM, Michael Schuster wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Jim Klimov  > wrote:
>
> > behalf of OI developers the adoption of an OpenIndiana Code of
> >> Conduct. The draft text for this new document can be found
> >> at http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct/.
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> >
> >You put things on discussion and editing before putting them on site.
>
>
> perhaps, to help avoid (further) confusion or misapprehension, the
> draft could be named as such,
> eg  http://www.openindiana.org/community/code-of-conduct-draft/ (and
> the current link removed until a final version is reached)? Plus, make
> it much clearer in the document that it's a draft.

It's not just about saying "it's draft". That does not solves the problem.

No unfinished half-things should be put on site like this.

It is about editing and decision process.

No body made it a document suitable to be put on site, so it should'nt
be there, but on Wiki to be edited and discuseed etc.

It's a process not an act.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana user survey

[Nikola M]

On 07/12/16 05:36 AM, Fred Liu wrote:
>
>  
>
> Done and thanks!
>
>  
>
>
> This will give us answers to several questions and the information
> will help us improve OpenIndiana.
>

It also can be rigged, does not connect between poll and optionally
letting people know who is the person willing to do something.
And poll results are also open for conclusions and also results are not
available before it's end and does not provide a chance for interpreting
results in the open.
Also poll questions are made not in open and are suggesting answers.
OI site is probably not choosed as poll place because of these benefits.
Misusing public opininons in a way everyone can do with them however
likes,  Seems like Brexit to me. :)

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana user survey

[Nikola M]

On 07/11/16 10:04 PM, Adam Števko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On behalf of the OI developers, I’d like to ask all the community
> members and developers to complete a short OpenIndiana survey form
> located
> at 
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1k2LNzxQxGdUZ7joL_tI3Aid_fzTGPxSDEAp83PbCmus/viewform.
>

Even this one-time survey is Ok and wouldn't hurt to fill in, and I urge
others to do so,
I would love to avoid using Google's oversight on data in the future,
whereas Google is omnipresent on internet and sites, tracking visitors.
It is always best practices to have forms available on OI's project site
in the future , to have data gathering exclusively under  project
control, to enable privacy protection.

If you delete cookies and browser cache before going to the site and
filling in the form, then it is,sort of, Ok/better.  Plus it is as I see
targeted to OI contributors and not widest audience on openindiana-discuss.

> This will give us answers to several questions and the information
> will help us improve OpenIndiana.
>
> Completing this form should not take more than 15 minutes and will
> help us tremendously, so I’d like to encourage all people on both
> lists to participate.
>
> I’ll leave the form open till the end of August  2016.
>
> Thanks for all answers!
>
> Cheers,
> Adam

General internet privacy notes (from me, in general):
I suggest to in everyday use, one uses the combination of 3 Firefox
addons to avoid constant Google tracking:
Noscript - blocks all Google (not blocked by default) and other scripts,
but those turned on for visiting sites, temporarely - needs some sort of
user selection what scripts to turn on and when ; 
Ghostery - source-visible, invisible tracking protections  ;
Self-destructing cookies - destroys cookies after closing tabs or
browser, not letting other sites use them to track you ;
And sometimes, clearing on-disk cache and all cookies.

That being said, if you don't have site-visiting tail like explained,
then it's Ok to use Google form from time to time, or even with using
some http proxy, since it's wouldn't'e tie yourself to the data in the
form if cookies and cached content are deleted before and aferwards.

It is not the problem if project like OI acquire data , people should
contribute to the project sharing it to make Openindiana better, sharing
user's data with Google is clearly not the best way to protect user's
interests. it is just important to see that same can be achieved putting
form on the Oi's own site and that Google forms are rather not needed
and it is also good to consult others when taking distro-wide action,
together with sort of all possible interpretations of data/results and
having records available within project boundaries at all times.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

[oi-dev] Testing request for firefox@45.2.0

[Nikola M]

||Testing requiest for
pkg://userland/web/browser/firefox@45.2.0,5.11-2016.0.0.0:20160608T095701Z
has been received.

See at Wiki page:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Testing+packages+by+using+local+per-package+mirror
for testing procedure using local per-package mirror.

Make sure you create backup BE without new publisher, you can come back 
to after testing.


Alternatively doing per-package testing, one can temporarely add 
http://buildzone.oi-build.r61.net:1000/ userland publisher,

but I think that per-package testing is more precise||.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] how to reg wiki.openindiana.org ?

[Nikola M]

On 06/ 8/16 11:28 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:



On 06/08/2016 03:13 AM, Nikola M wrote:


Can you say few things about yourself as an introduction?

You can start writing on topics you want, send me to my e-mail for
starters and for quality control.
Or to the mailing list itself and we'll see if opening Wiki account is
needed.

If you have some ideas, feel free to share and discuss on mailing list.
I hope you made your mailing list filters in your mail client
application, as suggested :)


We're also looking into other (possibly better) ways to present end 
user documentation. But at this moment, the Wiki remains the official 
go to place to write docs.


Wiki is not connected to this,  Don't know why you change the topic?

Also to call something documentation it is not enough to have some 
articles..
I would put quality of texts in the first place, everything else is 
secondary.



https://github.com/makruger/website-2.0


Your sites are almost unreadable, because of all thse white spaces 
together with large fonts that force anyone taking a look to scroll till 
eternity, I get bored very soon.


Plus as I see it is a mishmash between notes, documents, howtos, and 
prescribe team organisation with roles that is over-pretentious as 
already said before.. General impression is not very positive.



We're treating docs just like code.


And articles are not the code..

I hope that all that effort dosn't want to "fix" one-click Wiki publishing..


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] how to reg wiki.openindiana.org ?

[Nikola M]

On 06/ 7/16 11:36 PM, mlist_brigar via oi-dev wrote:

Hi all!

How to reg wiki.openindiana.org ?
I would like to participate, and it is possible to make a small
contribution.


That is just great.
What you are thinking about writing?  Are you thinking of writing in 
your natural language, too?
There is also the need for localization of the web site pages in other 
languages then English.

(http://openindiana.org/pipermail/openindiana-discuss/2016-May/thread.html#18919)

Can you say few things about yourself as an introduction?

You can start writing on topics you want, send me to my e-mail for 
starters and for quality control.
Or to the mailing list itself and we'll see if opening Wiki account is 
needed.


If you have some ideas, feel free to share and discuss on mailing list. 
I hope you made your mailing list filters in your mail client 
application, as suggested :)



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] #6981 VLC 2.2.2 misses icons after libpng update

[Nikola M]

On 05/18/16 01:10 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
Well I just updated and basically lost the majority of the icons even 
in Gnome... this also caused complete havoc to the Nimbus theme...


I don't see that for Nimbus theme at me after update today, I can see 
icons right.
My problem is that I can't open nautilus after update, under my account 
but can under another.


I have set:
$ cat /etc/fonts/local.conf




  
  
medium
false
  


To fix  some fonts issues after fonconfig update. (Letters inside 
Thunderbird mails are still bigger then should, but "bolder bold" is 
fixed with this.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] #6981 VLC 2.2.2 misses icons after libpng update

[Nikola M]

On 05/18/16 01:10 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:
Well I just updated and basically lost the majority of the icons even 
in Gnome... this also caused complete havoc to the Nimbus theme...




I just updated and restarted (BE date 2016-05-18 13:34)
and for one account i can't start nautilus anymore: (also desktop 
flashes that could mean it restarts)


(nautilus:4539): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal: 
assertion 'version == hash_table->version' failed


(nautilus:4539): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_foreach_remove_or_steal: 
assertion 'version == hash_table->version' failed


But for another account (primary admin) I can start nautilus.

VLC seems to have icons now OK. (I had problem with right-click, Open 
with vlc before, but don't have nautilus to try now).


For nautilus, may be some clash for existing user local settings with 
newly compiled.. something?




___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Public Documentation License (terms)

[Nikola M]

On 05/18/16 09:25 AM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:

On 05/18/2016 04:33, Michael Kruger wrote:


-
Taking the discussion in yet another direction,

Given neither Illumos or OpenIndiana are legal entities, I presume for
the purpose of complying to the terms of the PDL, the individual names
of each contributor would need to be listed in the PDL notice of any
document licensed under the terms of the PDL.



If we really need to name every contributor in PDL appendix for each 
modified document, then something like 
https://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-doc-license.html looks much 
more practical for new documentation.




FreeBSD has nothing to do with Openindiana as a name of project is 
different and it's Other OS.
We can't use license that market competitor OS and require it's mention 
for derived documents.
If "Something like" is to taken into account, then take into account 
that - that _license text_ itself _is licensed_ already .
(And that analysing and making "something like" would require possibly 
long discussions and would at the moment represent the waste of time, 
like many good ideas)


I don't think that we need to devise our own docs license at all at the 
moment. Contributing it to the project through Wiki is enough for now.
We really have much more work on other things then to burry ourself into 
licensing stuff.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Public Documentation License (terms)

[Nikola M]

On 05/18/16 04:13 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:


One last thought on all this.

If the content found on OpenIndiana.org (wiki, www) is not PDL 
licensed (as far as I can tell, this appears to be a true statement), 
then the argument to use the PDL for new documents 


No one forced you, just it would be best to do so to have it at PDL as 
final destination to keep it free for people coming after all of us.

And if you are PDL-compatible, it can be included in PDL.
Since current Opensolaris docs to be extended are PDL, it got to get PDL 
accepted and compatible with PDL in previous stages, to reuse both Wiki 
and additional changes into final PDL updated docs.


Since submitted on OI wiki, all wiki content is subjected to OI project 
to do what want with it, so no external sites, but Openindiana site.


It could be safely said that current OI content is submitted to OI 
project to be used by it.

So OI wiki is compatible with your possible intention to contributing to it.

(for the sake of re-usability on OpenIndiana.org) does not seem to be 
valid.


This is wrong and conclusion that attacks Openindiana as general. Please 
don't attack Openindiana anymore and spread FUD about Openindiana Wiki.


It is obvious that all content on Wiki is subjected to OI operating 
system distribution project as part of illumos and nothing else is needed.
*So if there needs to be any conclusion,you are not allowed to drain out 
OI wiki content to external site* and it mostly is not needed because it 
is to end up into PDL anyway.


Have your contribution toward OI open and with positive attitude is 
great way and by filling Wiki with more great content, Openindiana can 
get better.


Wiki is there as a good tool for revision and contribution without the 
need to manage complicated processes, as any Wiki is. (And it has it's 
own logs already)


Having said that, there may be other valid reasons...such as drawing 
content from the OpenSolaris books. In this case, the PDL makes more 
sense, but even then isn't actually a requirement.


I wouldn't jump conclusions, there are actually no any reason to think 
that OI Wiki is derived from Opensolaris books.
But the point is that getting integrated into future Openindiana docs 
reusing Opensolaris docs is to go through Openindiana project, not 
external site.
So you are stuck with co-operating with Openindiana people , that is the 
positivie conclusion - you need to cooperate with community to reuse , 
include and be part of it. :)




Such a larger work could for example use the MIT license (as long as 
the terms of the PDL were met for the content which came from a PDL 
source). But in such a case, the PDL would probably make things less 
confusing and easier to manage.


This is the right conclusion.

Need for articles to go through Wiki is because there is the need for 
in-project revision process , to make sure quality of articles is at the 
high level, and it's not feasible at the moment the other way.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] Public Documentation License (terms)

[Nikola M]

On 05/18/16 03:33 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
The 'OpenSolaris' documents hosted on the Oracle website do NOT 
contain any such PDL license declaration either visibly or contained 
in the HTML source. I think it's safe to conclude PDF copies of these 
documents are not PDL licensed either.


Oracle holds copyright so they can do whatever they want.
Then don't look at PDFs from Oracle if it brings you FUD as a topic,
there are PDFs with Opensoalris logos made for 2009.06 release.
So it's weither you got one archive or another.. and there is also 
Solbooktrans tols to make it.


Don't get obsessed with licenses too much.

You can you accept PDL?



How exactly does one go about identifying the original portions from 
the Joyent modified portions? 


Why does that matter actually if they accepted it. You can ask people 
contributing.



One might even say editing a PDL licensed document outside of some 
kind of change tracking system would likely NOT be in compliance with 
the terms of the license UNLESS they also manually (and might I say 
painstakingly) documented exactly what changed, and precisely who made 
the changes. 


There is a world before CVS and both can be used, one can take 
file-based contributions and bring them to CVS with needed info.

This is a wrong conclusion, but is a right answer.

If CVS is used to document attribution and history, then it is good to 
be consistent with it, but no one stops anyone to use both.

So basically you can't stop people to contribute however they like actually.

Notice that attribution recording topic is unrelated to tools used to 
make changes are on thord-party site or local apps, and wiether CVS and 
contribution process is on-OI site or elsewhere in the wild.


Actual in-CVS listing contributions (and having them extracted from time 
to time to also have a listing of contributions in other way) I think is 
preferred way.
And listing contribution and recording in one way or another does not 
exclude one another at all.
(it is better to say both have it's uses and benefits), where most 
benefit is seen with separating attribution list from actual content 
that might be filled with copyright notices over time. Yet producing 
automated list of contributors with list of their work is good to have.


So, if the content found on openindiana.org or wiki.openindiana.org 
were PDL licensed, then it would also follow that any document created 
from such content would then need to include all the contributor names 
in it's PDL notice.


This is not resolved yet for Wiki...
If it is, then I think that would be needed only on first import to save 
the space and time later, but it can include it later


You can't just suck up on our wiki to external place just like that (and 
why would want to exclude it's contents from Openindiana.org??.


Contribution process is other way around, you submit articles, they get 
included in Wiki.
Revisioning of your articles before coming to the site, should come up 
to Wiki first to be checked out.
Nothing is going to OI site (and why would go to site by default?) 
before revised first.


And if a large document such as a new handbook was created from such 
content, then the list of contributors would need to include all the 
authors from each and every source document. 


So it's nighmare, ha?
Like said having single license and accepting it, is clearest way, as 
already suggested.


While both of the websites support change tracking, this concern might 
be completely irrelevant because none of the documents found on 
openindiana.org appear to contain visible PDL license declarations or 
notices. 


Getting through Wiki before going to site is for keeping things together.
But this stands open as topic.

Writing articles should not be the place to catch much glory or 
attention to oneself. Like every contribution, by default, everyone 
contributing is humble and thankful for previous people working on 
things they use or try to make better.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/17/16 08:54 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:

On 05/16/16 11:28 PM, Nikola M wrote:

On 05/17/16 05:46 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
In regards to the PDL, to whom does one submit a signed contributor 
agreement?


To Openindiana and illumos surely.


Neither OI nor illumos have any legal entity to assign copyright to - 
no foundations or non-profit corporations were ever formed.


One more reason to have PDL in use, because it remains free, it remains 
inclusive and always available and can't be turned into proprietary, all 
that even without contributor agreement.


Therefore, that as expected has much more sense, and "Openindiana all 
rights reserved" has no full/any meaning, but it has if exact license, 
like PDL (or other compatible, MIT is compatible as I know) is stated.




You could only assign to individuals like Garrett or Alasdair, or to a
commercial company like Joyent, Everycity, or Oracle.

I suspect after what happened to OpenSolaris though, no one is interested
in further assignments to commercial entities of the right to make things
proprietary.

Fortunately, none of the licenses involved require such agreements.

-alan-



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/17/16 01:25 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:

Other general note. If we have to use some documentation tools to write
OI documentation, they should be available in OI repository. Perhaps
it's not true for IDEs, but basic tools should be there.



In the case of this website, there really aren't any tools. That's the 
beauty of it all. The site is completely self contained and inclusive 
of all it's documents. Creating or editing documents only requires a 
plain text editor (VIM, Gedit, etc.). 


This is not true as i know, since as I have seen, you require for using 
third site for editing asciidoc documents and it is using Google 
javascripts, undermining privacy.


When mentioning tools, it is meant to have desktop tools to edit files 
offline and on OI's desktop.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/17/16 01:25 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:
more useful. Just so you know, it's been my intention all along to 
start pulling in reusable content from the Wiki, etc. 


On the contrary,  ways for reviewing your writings are that are included 
in Wiki after revision.
Wiki is here to stay for a long time and does not support pulling into 
outside proprietary things.


So no draining content outside form Wiki, but pulling it in to be better.
If you have in mind making Oi better.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/17/16 04:19 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:

On 05/16/2016 04:33 AM, Jim Klimov wrote:

In your defense, perhaps it makes sense to mark Michael's pages 
visibly as a draft/experiment/poc/etc. of a possible future of OI 
docs and not the official resource at this moment, so readers of the 
preview pages are not confused.


This is a good idea Jim, which I have implemented.


Articles per se, are not documentation even if called like that.
So they are clearly not the future of docs, for docs they are not.

It would be best calling them articles and totally expunge 
"Organisational" parts as not needed at the moment. But since it's 
private site, it's in makruger's discression to do with he's own site 
whatever he wants,

BUT calling it Openindiana site...



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/17/16 05:46 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:

On 05/16/2016 02:43 AM, Nikola M wrote:



Posting any "guides" and "roles" inside Openindiana without consultation
of others and wider audience is simply arrogant and destructive to
Openindiana and that represents TROLLING of Openindiana.

Anyone wanting to make OI a prison for "roles" and "policies" in
privately handled conspiration-like consultations behind closed doors is
doing things against OI's and OI's users personal freedoms.


Nikolam,

My identification and specification of contributor roles is purely for 
the sake of organization. It is not meant to limit anyone's personal 
freedoms.


Prescribing "organisation" is arrogant way to enter the community.
Precisely everything OI hipster represents is avoidance of complicated 
procedures and functions, roles and being efficient with less people.
Not only that, but putting yourself in the center of the 
universe/processes you are self-proclaming yourself with roles no one 
supported you to have, and since I recognize such behavior as arrogant, 
will not be supported.


Identifying roles helps contributors better understand the different 
ways in which someone can 


As said numerous time already.
You ar enot making segregation roles at this time.
That is a currently regarded as a sick concept and  the moment not 
applicable to current state of affairs.


Moreover, without hearing what I am saying for several weeks and 
ignoring everything including technical details, you are ignoring 
well-being of OI in general.


You even tried putting in danger even a discussion process in OI , 
"complaining" about people instead of ideas.  Putting people's roles in 
front of ideas and people's freedom of communication, is clear violation 
of community process based on non-segregation, decentralization and a 
positive attitude toward people in the sake of community.
You can't form anything if you don't have positive attitude toward 
people and segregating them is using negativity and in a bad way.


contribute. For example, most people may wish to limit their 
activities to the role of content creator (author). 


No, you are wrong. People tend to expand their horizons and this is 
delusional idea that average people are content with being someone's 
slave, puppet or employee.
We are not promoting crashing anyone's freedom to contribute just 
because some might like it that way.
Even discussing about limiting people's scope and freedom makes me 
thinking of your capabilities of even comprehend organizing anything.


They may not be interested in performing tasks associated with the 
role of 'website developer' (one who extents the capabilities of the 
site), nor tasks associate with the role of 'content reviewer' (one 
who reviews pull requests).


I am to inform you that you are not to decide who has what role.
And also that there is simple too little people at the moment to be.
And that you are not the guy who have recognized qualities to mandate roles.



All these roles are necessary for the site to succeed. Think of them 
simply as organizational definitions to help guide the documentation 
effort.


You are not by any means connected with OI site.
Any "role" that you think or maybe want to have on OI site is 
self-proclamed , and it is simply disgusting to see you filling any part 
of OI site with shit like this.


You are not excellent writer and proved don't accept suggestions and you 
tend to seek confrontation instead of collaboration.
You are talking about "owning" OI site and proclaiming "victory" over it 
for your ideas that are not applicable to small number of people, and 
even destructive as we are seeing from this dialogue over weeks.
Yet you forcefully peruse ideas that is explained to you numerous times 
that are bad from multiple standing points, social, organizational, 
technical, personal..






You are not going to single-handed destroy positive community process
with the reviews, good intention to everyone, without isolationist
policies, freedom of contribution and a good will in general.
You are not allowed to police Openindiana contribution process.



If documentation resides in a GitHub repository, 


And it is not, not yours.

then someone has to review the pull requests. 


And it's not you. Not even close at the moment.

It does not necessarily have to be me performing this role, 


No and if we don't have "prescribed" roles atm, not at all..


although I am the most likely candidate


No you are most likely self proclaimed (enter the word of anyone's likings).
Not only you are not a good candidate,
but by still not accepting real Opensolaris docs PDL licensing and any 
guidance provided up to now, you pretty much excluded yourself from any 
role in a long time.



unless someone else wishes to do it.


And that is getting back to "bad roles" idea proclaimed and con

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/16/16 11:27 AM, Nikola M wrote:

On 05/16/16 09:43 AM, Adam Števko wrote:


STOP calling your private site "Openindiana docs" they are not , 
simply

because you just wrote something on your site and you just say so.
Working on things alone and then coming up with aspiration to turn
around everything is not friendly behavior to Openindiana and it's
community.
Please, Nikola, stop it...  If you have technical notices to the 
docs, please, post them. Michael is trying to do something which 
will become official OI docs site one day. He has posted links to 
get feedback on his work. Once we are satisfied with the site, it 
will be moved to OI infrastructure. At least, it's the plan.


We need technical reviews, not personal attacks.


My techical notices and reviews are getting ignored all the time even 
I got multiple positive feedbacks that there are tens of big issues 
with this king of trolling of OI that Makruger is doing.


It was meant to be said "kind of " not "king of" that is a mistake.



Contribution process if accepted like this is broken because requires 
to go to third asciidoc site.
It also requires Google's javascript to work and that is against 
user's privacy.
Article selection should be from inside OI's people and not from 
Makruger's own will(!!)


Calling it "OI docs" is a lie. Openoslaris docs to be revisited are 
PDL and he's not accepting PDL.

3 article made and not through Openindiana Wiki is not revision process.
Those articles are seriously lacking in every respect including very 
bad things already on OI's FAQ (like needing to have 4GB of RAM to run 
OI , that is obviously untrue) and having articles very long meaning, 
Makruger is KILLING new contributors process.
And finally including "roles" and policing "who can do what" is really 
fascist as an idea.
Someone must say that those "people isolating" ideas are fascists and 
need to be stopped before they are too late.


Asking people to stop talk in public and discuss is trolling of OI and 
replacing it with PRIVATE talk and closed lists is not what people 
searching freedom in using free software and open source have in mind.
Attacking me personally for expressing that including "docs trolls" in 
OI is huge mistake that will end up in undermining all work done for 
years.





___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs - updated

[Nikola M]

On 05/16/16 09:43 AM, Adam Števko wrote:



STOP calling your private site "Openindiana docs" they are not , simply
because you just wrote something on your site and you just say so.
Working on things alone and then coming up with aspiration to turn
around everything is not friendly behavior to Openindiana and it's
community.

Please, Nikola, stop it...  If you have technical notices to the docs, please, 
post them. Michael is trying to do something which will become official OI docs 
site one day. He has posted links to get feedback on his work. Once we are 
satisfied with the site, it will be moved to OI infrastructure. At least, it's 
the plan.

We need technical reviews, not personal attacks.


My techical notices and reviews are getting ignored all the time even I 
got multiple positive feedbacks that there are tens of big issues with 
this king of trolling of OI that Makruger is doing.


Contribution process if accepted like this is broken because requires to 
go to third asciidoc site.
It also requires Google's javascript to work and that is against user's 
privacy.
Article selection should be from inside OI's people and not from 
Makruger's own will(!!)


Calling it "OI docs" is a lie. Openoslaris docs to be revisited are PDL 
and he's not accepting PDL.

3 article made and not through Openindiana Wiki is not revision process.
Those articles are seriously lacking in every respect including very bad 
things already on OI's FAQ (like needing to have 4GB of RAM to run OI , 
that is obviously untrue) and having articles very long meaning, 
Makruger is KILLING new contributors process.
And finally including "roles" and policing "who can do what" is really 
fascist as an idea.
Someone must say that those "people isolating" ideas are fascists and 
need to be stopped before they are too late.


Asking people to stop talk in public and discuss is trolling of OI and 
replacing it with PRIVATE talk and closed lists is not what people 
searching freedom in using free software and open source have in mind.
Attacking me personally for expressing that including "docs trolls" in 
OI is huge mistake that will end up in undermining all work done for years.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/12/16 05:31 AM, benta...@chez.com wrote:

Hi,
  After unconmpressing the archive from / (so location of binaries are in 
/usr/local/bin), most of the binaries complains about not having access to 
libdconf.so.1 which isn't in the archive nor standard repos.
Calculator works fine, though


Please all.
Hit reply in your mail client application when sending replies to 
mailing lists, so they can be inline with message threads. Thanks a lot.


I was uncompressing MATE into /usr/local as Ken suggested yesterday
(http://echelog.com/logs/browse/oi-dev/1462917600)
and I made symlink  for .desktop so that gdm can recognize it:
pfexec ln -s /usr/local/share/xsessions/mate.desktop /usr/share/xsessions/

I also mostly copied changes from, now /usr/local/etc into /etc
and i added /usr/local/bin:/usr/local/bin in my ~/.profile under PATH

But it didn't make me run MATE desktop on login.
It runs mate-session process but that's it.

While in GNOME, mate-calc opens and seems to work, even if saying:
(mate-calc:7503): GLib-GObject-WARNING **: cannot register existing type 
'AtkObject'
** (mate-calc:7503): CRITICAL **: atk_object_set_name: assertion 
'ATK_IS_OBJECT (accessible)' failed)

but when launced on gnome, caja died:
 ld.so.1: caja: fatal: libdconf.so.1: open failed: No such file or 
directory



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

[oi-dev] Undead Thunderbird

[Nikola M]

Hello,

I catched Thunderbird acting strange yesterday, after being open for 
some time.

Sending on oi-dev per xenol suggestion.

It is stopping to refresh it's window and was freezing without response
and later closing window by itself , while staying in the background as 
a process..

https://bpaste.net/show/f00951104362

If you have idea what it could be, you can see mdb output I created,
I used mdb techinqe offered once by on #illumos:

$ ps -Af | grep thunder
 nikolam  6681  6676   0 01:53:28 pts/3   0:00 grep thunder
 nikolam  6210 1   0 23:23:31 ?  12:01 /usr/bin/thunderbird
$ sudo mdb -ke '0t6210::pid2proc'
ff020b89a0a8
$ sudo mdb -ke 'ff020b89a0a8::walk thread'
0xff020b787b00
0xff020b589080
0xff021586f760
0xff020b5b7480
0xff020d1c8b80
0xff020d1c8440
0xff0215877820
0xff020d6067e0
0xff020d1c80a0
0xff020d414c00
0xff020d410160
0xff020d5bd760
0xff020d374820
0xff0215875120
0xff020d410c40
0xff020d1cf060
0xff020d3797c0
0xff02158ce440
0xff022c5bb460
0xff020d40f8c0
0xff020d37fb20
0xff0215870740
0xff020d1ca420
0xff020b588b80
0xff020d612b20
0xff020d389740
0xff022c5ac840
0xff020d1c1860
0xff02066013a0
0xff022c5ba0e0
0xff020d1cf400
0xff02065fdb00
0xff0215872520
0xff02065ca8a0
0xff020680c400
0xff020d4154a0
0xff022c5adbc0
0xff022c5bf040
0xff020d26a8a0
0xff020d376ba0
0xff020d1cab60
0xff02158c7500
0xff0205c2ab40
0xff020b578740
0xff0215877bc0
$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020b787b00::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020b787b00 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_timedwait_sig_hrtime+0x35
 poll_common+0x554
 pollsys+0xe7
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020b589080::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020b589080 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_timedwait_sig_hrtime+0x35
 poll_common+0x554
 pollsys+0xe7
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff021586f760::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff021586f760 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_waituntil_sig+0xbd
 port_getn+0x39f
 portfs+0x1c0
 portfs32+0x40
 sys_syscall32+0xff

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020b5b7480::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020b5b7480 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_timedwait_sig_hrtime+0x35
 poll_common+0x554
 pollsys+0xe7
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020d1c8b80::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020d1c8b80 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_waituntil_sig+0xbd
 lwp_park+0x15e
 syslwp_park+0x63
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020d1c8440::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020d1c8440 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_waituntil_sig+0xbd
 lwp_park+0x15e
 syslwp_park+0x63
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff0215877820::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff0215877820 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_waituntil_sig+0xbd
 lwp_park+0x15e
 syslwp_park+0x63
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020d6067e0::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJCOUNT
ff020d6067e0 SLEEPCV  1
 swtch+0x141
 cv_wait_sig_swap_core+0x1b9
 cv_wait_sig_swap+0x17
 cv_waituntil_sig+0xbd
 lwp_park+0x15e
 syslwp_park+0x63
 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149

$ sudo mdb -ke '0xff020d1c80a0::stacks'
THREAD   STATESOBJ

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 8/16 11:57 PM, Nikola M wrote:

On 05/ 8/16 05:35 PM, ken mays via oi-dev wrote:


Hello,

The MATE 1.14 Desktop Environment is the continuation of GNOME 2. It 
provides an intuitive and attractive desktop environment using 
traditional metaphors for Linux and other Unix-like operating systems.


MATE 1.14 Desktop Environment

http://mate-desktop.org/blog/2016-04-08-mate-1-14-released/

About MATE: 
http://mate-desktop.org/blog/2014-02-07-stefano-presents-mate-at-fosdem/


Ref: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/MATE+1.14+Desktop

Contributed OpenIndiana MATE 1.14 Binaries: 
http://dlc.openindiana.org/mate-desktop/oi-mate-1.14-desktop-kmays_20160505.tar.xz


Mainly for testing, production use, and development. Comes with all 
the bells and whistles...


Hello, Could archive be accompanied with SHA256SUM file or 
filename.sha256sum on dlc ?


 Oh sorry, I see there is 
http://dlc.openindiana.org/mate-desktop/oi-mate-1.14-desktop-kmays_20160505.tar.xz.sha256 
that I overlooked, and it's 
c2a0526655868132ba00a951fee862716565f87290609dd7602ff919373bbe72




Thank you for providing testing image, before inclusion.
I congratulates on great achievement for future OI.

I suppose MATE inclusion in OI can be made in parall with existing GNOME?
(even if excluding one another, that I hope would not be needed)
So that one wanting to choosing to try MATE can install MATE as 
additional Desktop Environment besides existing GNOME and choose it on 
login.

What do you think?


This question about having MATE available in parallel with existing 
GNOME for at least some time, still stands.
So it can gradually be tried out and selectable in gdm as an desktop 
environment on login, so that many things can be checked for some time 
period, even after initial test period.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 9/16 07:59 AM, Jim Klimov wrote:

Hi Nikola,

I guess you're late to this particular party - the way to move forward with the 
resources and luggage we have was indeed discussed long ago.


Sorry I haven't seen it mentioned, maybe I missed it,  was here most the 
time for past years.


Thanks for fixing the announcement. Aurélien Larcher - jollyd, jimklimov


On the upside, whatever the naming and distribution of packages and recipes 
across consolidations, OI Hipster and according to plan also its expected 
less-bloody releases (dev, stable) after migration of all userland into one 
recipe repo/consolidation, are upgrade-compatible with the last OI-dev and 
OpenSolaris Indiana.


Testing those updating from /dev to hipster is what I'd like to see, so 
i asked for more people to try it out.


I wasn't expecting that it's updatable from Opensolaris directly, but 
through Openindiana /dev, but if it is too, that's exciting :P

Great times ahead, for sure :)


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 9/16 02:45 AM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com 
<mailto:minik...@gmail.com>> wrote:




OK. The difference is between names and labels: labels are moving
targets.

You can't introduce any labels, because they collide with the name
as explained or are innacurate. Labels are not needed and are
confusing.

Ok, so you will fix it to wording be "Old Openindiana development
releases" ?
And you will fix it that there is no any "Devide" in Openindiana
in the past and now?
That requires that your announcement be rewritten?
What do you propose to be exact wording of an announcement then?

I hope we don't need to put this to the vote,
since it is obvious that /legacy exists and is in use and that
"Vintage" cna't be used for labeling,
because it hurts proposed /dev repository renewal project.


If you had contributed almost a year ago when I offered you, you would 
not discover right now a page that has been online for months.


Don't misplace process obfuscation for a reason to leave there a bug you 
made and talking about person instead of an issue.


Please fix your issue with your announcement as requested, providing new 
version that is more appropriate, so it could be reviewed.

With what exact words do  you propose to fix your announcement?

Things going on site are very important to be accurate and with no 
misplaced words that confuse people visiting it.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 9/16 01:09 AM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Nikola M <minik...@gmail.com 
<mailto:minik...@gmail.com>> wrote:




It is about precising what is named what.
Not looking what is active and how long and how.

You can't call /dev past development releases a "Legacy" since
"Legacy" is reserved for /legacy and they are Opensolaris dev.
releases.

It's not about what is active or, not, we all know only OI hipster
is currently active it is simple you can't just decide to change
/dev's name because you say so,
because you create conflict of naming that creates confusion for
users and documentation.

I don't find this humorous , I understand you recommend that
Openindiana development releases in /dev be called "Vintage releases".
I don't think that is more appropriate to call it "Old Openindiana
/dev development releases" and naming it wit any new name
including one you proposed, would create confusion and disable
/dev renewal.


OK. The difference is between names and labels: labels are moving targets.


You can't introduce any labels, because they collide with the name as 
explained or are innacurate. Labels are not needed and are confusing.


Ok, so you will fix it to wording be "Old Openindiana development 
releases" ?
And you will fix it that there is no any "Devide" in Openindiana in the 
past and now?

That requires that your announcement be rewritten?
What do you propose to be exact wording of an announcement then?

I hope we don't need to put this to the vote,
since it is obvious that /legacy exists and is in use and that "Vintage" 
cna't be used for labeling,

because it hurts proposed /dev repository renewal project.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 9/16 12:08 AM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:





There is nothing like "legacy release". Bad choice if wording.
/legacy (pkg.openindiana.org/legacy
) holds opensolaris releases up
tp snv_134 and that is what Legacy is.

You are referring to Openindiana /dev development releases.


Like it or not, something dead for 2 years and unmaintained maybe 
called "legacy" but I can use "vintage" if you like.
I can also call it "Château OpenIndiana 2013 Vendange Tardive" or 
whatever, does not change the current developments.


It is about precising what is named what.
Not looking what is active and how long and how.

You can't call /dev past development releases a "Legacy" since "Legacy" 
is reserved for /legacy and they are Opensolaris dev. releases.


It's not about what is active or, not, we all know only OI hipster is 
currently active it is simple you can't just decide to change /dev's 
name because you say so,
because you create conflict of naming that creates confusion for users 
and documentation.


I don't find this humorous , I understand you recommend that Openindiana 
development releases in /dev be called "Vintage releases".
I don't think that is more appropriate to call it "Old Openindiana /dev 
development releases" and naming it wit any new name including one you 
proposed, would create confusion and disable /dev renewal.





Openindiana is currently not devided into anything, and there is
no devision between openindiana and Openindiana, so it is again
bad choice of wording.
Since only Openindiana Hipster is updated regularly, it is what is
obviously active, so there is nothing like division in Openindiana.


Moving from consolidations to oi-userland, dropping legacy and 
obsolete components, moving away from SUN compilers etc... make 151a 
and Hipster two different animals.
Additional philosophical questions: if a tree has several branches, is 
it divided ? does your self from 3 years ago identifies with your 
current self ? etc...


Openindiana is not divided. That is bad choice of words that sends the 
wrong message.
Think about what people from outside think when they hear the world 
"Devided", they simply won't get it.


Openindiana /hipster just continued to be active somewhere when OI /dev  
stopped being active, nothing is "devided" in Openindiana, how many 
projects or releases does it have.


This is a practical thing.
You have cow and a pig.  You decided to call a cow as a pig, because a 
cow didn't give you milk lately.
That is wrong, because pig is a pig and cow is a cow. (and neither cow 
is a sheep)

It's an old cow.

You can't call /dev other then "Old development releases", because 
"Legacy" is reserved and used already.




I think that plans of putting releases that could land in /dev out
of Hipster snapshot (after testing is made with updating) , could
be hurt, if you call Openindiana development releases in /dev with
the wrong name.


If you want to call "Development", something that is not developed, 
fair enough: come up with a better taxonomy, I have personally no 
strong opinion.


Development releases are both in /dev and /hipster now in past and in 
the future.


I think that it is sane plan to update contents on /dev with new dev 
release, made out of /hipster,
but you should stop calling /dev with the other name, including docs and 
mentions on site.




I propose "vintage", "indie" and "hipster" to stay rock'n roll.


Vintage is not good because /dev will stay /dev, yust updated with 
hipster snapshots.

That would allow that /dev people can see one day update notice.

Vintage as a name dosn't have any use at the moment and it would be too 
complicated to have and maintain transition period and explain that 
"vintage" is a /dev again.
It is mostly useless from all usage point to make a new name for /dev - 
old development releases.


I already mentioned that it would hurt /dev landing effort and create 
confusion, so please don't re-use "legacy" as a name and remove wrong 
references that include it and do not use proposed "vintage" as it is 
not accurate and also creates confusion.
Only option that is accurate now and in the past and will be in the 
future is "old development releases" (untill they are renewed).





Also if you have a separate announcement not related to the topic
can you please make a new topic on ML whe nposting separate topic?


I updated the page to point to MATE's Wiki page according to Ken's 
message so my reply is in no way unrelated.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough.
I was thinking that you should make new topic on mailing list when you 
anounced "roadmap page" update, because it is not directly related to 
MATE test build announcement (clearly not related to Mate).

That way it could be better noticed and not overlooked in different topic.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 8/16 05:35 PM, ken mays via oi-dev wrote:


Hello,

The MATE 1.14 Desktop Environment is the continuation of GNOME 2. It 
provides an intuitive and attractive desktop environment using 
traditional metaphors for Linux and other Unix-like operating systems.


MATE 1.14 Desktop Environment

http://mate-desktop.org/blog/2016-04-08-mate-1-14-released/

About MATE: 
http://mate-desktop.org/blog/2014-02-07-stefano-presents-mate-at-fosdem/


Ref: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/MATE+1.14+Desktop

Contributed OpenIndiana MATE 1.14 Binaries: 
http://dlc.openindiana.org/mate-desktop/oi-mate-1.14-desktop-kmays_20160505.tar.xz


Mainly for testing, production use, and development. Comes with all 
the bells and whistles...


Hello, Could archive be accompanied with SHA256SUM file or 
filename.sha256sum on dlc ?


Thank you for providing testing image, before inclusion.
I congratulates on great achievement for future OI.

I suppose MATE inclusion in OI can be made in parall with existing GNOME?
(even if excluding one another, that I hope would not be needed)
So that one wanting to choosing to try MATE can install MATE as 
additional Desktop Environment besides existing GNOME and choose it on 
login.

What do you think?

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] MATE 1.14 Desktop for OpenIndiana

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 8/16 07:32 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:


On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Alexander 
> 
wrote:


It looks like a fresh wind blowing in the OI sails again.


Maybe at some point we''ll even get Firefly as default recovery image, 
who knows ;)


What's 'Firefly', that you refer to and what is 'default recovery 
image', you are referring?


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs (proof of concept) - What is it all about?

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 6/16 03:51 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:



You need to understand WHY you support some actual project,
possibly using it and wanting to have sucsess because you NEED it
to work out.  Not just some side-hobby because it is good place to
spend your time without personal involvement part.
So think again about your motivation and get back when you have
something more positive to say about OI.


Please stay on-topic: technical feedback on a demonstration.


It is on topic as much as previous message is on topic.
It is you who are talking to me personally instead of saying something 
about issues I pointed out..

Get back and try to actually answer to my post instead of talking to me..




This idea of yours is a cancer and you are just reading a cure for it.
Also if you base your "inclusion" in "excluding" people as a main
tool, you surely are _not_ a material for any type of human and
project management in OI.


Same applies here, your attitude is dismissive and you do not provide 
input regarding the technical merits or shortcomings of the proposal.


This is technical issue that converting docs should be done within 
Openindiana project with tools we have and not outside of it.



The matter has been discussed several times, including on IRC with you.


No you are not telling the truth as i know of it.
If you discussed something privately with Michael, that is not what is 
publicly known, before you started with extracting Handbook out of 
Openindiana.




This is a discussion, let us remain open and courteous and let us get 
back to the topics: technical benefits + contribution process.


Please, you are not responding to anything I said but you are trolling 
me personally.


Please use your own medicine and for a change respond to issues I posted 
before.


I can't repeat myself because you refuse to read.

___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 6/16 08:06 PM, WebDawg wrote:

I am starting from the first email because there have been so many
replies and responses to this one and no one has provided anything but
it seems negative feedback to this git site.  I also see very little
contribution to the subject of documentation.

Right now a majority of OpenIndiana docs are on the wiki here:
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/OpenIndiana+Wiki+Home

I have never even heard of http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/ until it
was mentioned a few days ago.


Michael Kruger maliciously requested yesterday that all Opensolaris docs 
be removed from
http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/ , not telling he requested to host 
expanded .zip with Opensolaris docs as reference, but I requested for 
another Dir with Docs be there for Docs renewal reference.


They are available on and are re-distributible and are available for 
reuse under PDL on:

https://mega.nz/#F!PJI2yLAK!B58qhG2jqIffPNtQD9dKqw

When you unpack them you can read all of them, and you get all the docs 
we have from Opensolaris and there is also application for exporting 
from DocBook XML into HTML and PDF and those are what Openinidana docs 
can build upon, same as illumos was grown form Opensolaris.

Trere are tool on:
https://github.com/rmustacc/illumos-docbooks  under /tools (SolBook Trans)
GUI part needs fixing but in CLI it does the job of making Html and PDF.

We currently have extensive existing "Openindiana handbook" on Oi Wiki 
and it can be extended as needed: 
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/OpenIndiana+Handbook


You can propose changes and request Wiki account if you have updates in 
mind.


(unless someone trolls out for them to be removed so he can say they 
"don't exist"..)



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] OpenIndiana Docs (proof of concept) - What is it all about?

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 4/16 07:00 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:


* Community conduct
* Project visibility
* Proof of concepts

* Version control
* Hosting infrastructure
* Project marketing, SEO

* Existing docs (OSOL Docs)
* Viability/Usability of Wiki
* dlc.openindiana.org/docs
* Documentation Standards (media types, etc.)
* Licensing/Contributer agreements/copyrights, branding etc.


As I see you haven't start talking on any of this topics. Ah well.



So, this is my creative outlet. This is a place where I can express 
myself, learn, try new things, and explore new ideas. It's a place 
where I can (hopefully) make a difference.


So basically, you need a place to vent?
i think OI community can recognize there is much more then this to be 
connected to OI.


You need to understand WHY you support some actual project, possibly 
using it and wanting to have sucsess because you NEED it to work out.  
Not just some side-hobby because it is good place to spend your time 
without personal involvement part.
So think again about your motivation and get back when you have 
something more positive to say about OI.



If not, the project will eventually curl up and die.


No it will not cur.. and it surely does not depend on you..
Are you injecting to us some feeling of bad taste?

However, before any of that happens, people may find themselves 
needing to work alone or in small groups 


That way of working is not positive , all work needs to be public 
(therefore no submarines).
Constant communicating plans, intentions and work has a positive way of 
having feedback that can correct you in early stages and make it better.

So we should not support constantly including new submarines as a process.
You should as frequently and to many people: "what do you think?", "have 
any idea?" and not thinking you always (or ever) having the best one.
So accepting other peoples' reactions an guidance is crucial if you 
don't want to go underwater.


specifically and intentionally excluding individuals with problematic 
behaviors. This will occur because it's simply not possible to get 
anything done in an atmosphere of hostility, jumping to premature 
conclusions, or where kvetching is the rule of the day.


Coming from isolated environment, you misplace open reactions and idea 
and project building for hostility.


Actually, ANY request for actual hostility creation toward individuals , 
that you recommend as a way of doing things must be squashed instantly.
Trolling this project with "exclusion" of people as way of doing things 
will not be accepted.
ANYONE asking for any other person to be disgarded should be disgarded 
itself so that such unfriendly and inhumane requests you propose don't 
tore this community apart.


This idea of yours is a cancer and you are just reading a cure for it.
Also if you base your "inclusion" in "excluding" people as a main tool, 
you surely are _not_ a material for any type of human and project 
management in OI.


This leads me to suggest there should be an OpenIndiana 'Code of 
Conduct' to help reign in people with troublesome behaviors. After 
all, such individuals effectively prevent others from achieving 
anything meaningful. The future of the project may very well depend on 
it.


You just broke unofficial existing Code of conduct, that is not calling 
people themselves "kvetching" and bad names and therefore lowering 
discussions to off-topic and personal attacks.
Presenting my comments above I see you are not understanding how things 
are done openly, I suggest you don't get yourself into any type of 
creating Codes of conduct, especially not for OI.


Doing things openly - it is normal to have reactions and having them is 
exactly what IS positive.
And it is not normal to replicate closed, isolated and excluding 
environment that you are maybe used to.




 I wrote it all for the pure joy of writing. And in the spirit of 
community, it's free and available to all.


As said, you got to work on your motivations, but that's again, your 
personal thing and not putting personal things is a good way not to be 
ditched in off-topic.



1) Place documentation under distributed version control.
2) Lower the bar of entry to the documentation process.
3) Make changes and quickly deploy those changes in some kind of 
automated fashion (e.g. continuous integration).
4) Present the documentation in an organized and aesthetically 
pleasing way.


This is all already solved by Openindiana Wiki.
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/OpenIndiana+Wiki+Home
Acually illumos even turned it's main page to wiki, to have less BS to 
be worried about.


It's been said that a project lives or dies by it's documentation. 
Whether that's really true or not, I don't know, but the general 
perception for OpenIndiana is it's largely an undocumented project.


Surely this is not true and Openindiana is documented through Wiki and 
Opensolaris docs that need renewal,

while large part of Openindiana functionality is mutual with illumos, 

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 2/16 06:29 PM, WebDawg wrote:
You guys are all so very confusing.  It seems to me someone put 
together an example docs site and everyone keeps talking about how it 
is hosted on github, licensing, and stuff.


Please hit "reply" when posting to the list so your answers stay in-line 
on the list and are not top-posted.


Did I miss something or did the individual that submitted it say it 
has to stay there?


I get the XML thing...it seems like that is one of the big real issues 
that it does not conform to an existing OI standard.


There is no official standard, there are docs in XML and can be renewed.

I mean, the individual does not have to use your servers to develop 
something...


Sure, but individual wants to decide what is in OI's docs and is not and 
that is OI"s issue not only individuals.


And it is argued that it is best for docs renewal and additions to stay 
within OI's site so they could be under OI project and that it needs to 
follow licensing, contributing agreement etc. and that rewriting it from 
the start is painful workaround when there's existing docs.


Also there is a Wiki to write short articles instead of external sites. 
(wiki.openindiana.org)




Does the content suck?  Is it good?  Everyone is now talking about 
changing documentation standards?


You can look for yourself :)
It surely misses all those Opensolaris books listed on 
dlc.openindiana.org/docs



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 2/16 03:44 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:

On Mon, 2 May 2016, Nikola M wrote:


On 05/ 2/16 08:56 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:

On 05/ 1/16 10:48 PM, Nikola M wrote:
*You aether accept open documentation license including Contributor 
agreement to

OI or you contribute your time at somewhere else.*


Why don't you let the people who run the project decide whether or 
not to accept

contributions before you chase everyone away?


There is no one who "runs the project" except us all, here and now, 
together.

Everyone is free to contribute in all possible ways he seems fit.

Support proprietary projects is not very high on my list.


You made a lot of good points but in total it felt hostile.  It seems 
like you are saying that if perfection is not possible, then the work 
is not worth doing.




Like I haven't said so ;) Having good intentions in mind can help not 
avoiding the topic itself.


It seems most important that the license for the documentation 
(regardless of where it is initially developed) is suitable for other 
uses in OpenIndiana and that it can be incorporated in OpenIndiana 
documentation (or cut/pasted as part of blogs) as maintainers/athors 
see fit.


You are right.
And since we can't change existing Opensolaris documentation licence 
that needs to renewed.. we ar kind of married to it unless we want to 
loose all docs.
I don't think starting from scratch is meaningful and neither having 
then outside openindiana site.


I suggest that Wiki (wiki.openindiana.org) is a nice place to write 
shorter articles that can be easily reviewed and changed in wiki way and 
as a plus, they are instantly available on OI's site.

(and after, wiki be incorporated into documentation).

Actually, changes to docs need time and starting to review illumos 
changes and later OI's changes since Opensolaris, so we can have them 
all covered and start implementing changed on day to day bases at a moment.
Since there are so many docs available, 
(http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/) it is wise renewing them.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 2/16 10:30 AM, Илья Архипкин wrote:
Very well written, and you officially their conviction simply am not 
who wrote a lot of paperwork, but in this segment of the Russian order 
to find a lot of people are erotic, free content. And to compete with 
my domain get a DDoS-attacks, spam attacks. Moreover, against the 
background of Russophobia


I think you are a bit offtopic :) ,
I am sorry your site has attacked.

You can maybe even use Russian when posting, if providing some automatic 
translation (was using proprietary service 
http://www.bing.com/translator for Ggerman in both ways), so maybe you 
can post in both Russian and English so your posts can be more 
understandable? :P



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 2/16 08:56 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:

On 05/ 1/16 10:48 PM, Nikola M wrote:
*You aether accept open documentation license including Contributor 
agreement to

OI or you contribute your time at somewhere else.*


Why don't you let the people who run the project decide whether or not 
to accept

contributions before you chase everyone away?


There is no one who "runs the project" except us all, here and now, 
together.

Everyone is free to contribute in all possible ways he seems fit.

Support proprietary projects is not very high on my list.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 1/16 03:13 PM, Michael Kruger wrote:
point, the site and it's contents automatically builds and deploys 
upon git commit.
Building prior making something should be done on OI's servers to ensure 
it includes only what is in the source.



All Openindiana infrastructure things can be easily covered within OI's
infrastructure, regarding the need for test sites, GIT repositories, and
in-development documentation hosting.

I disagree.


All infrastructure needs are easily covered with OI's infrastructure and 
there is nothing to agree nor disagree upon, that is just a fact. 
Spinning up the git is easily done.
Example: trying to share release ISO or docs archive and one quickly 
finds out needing site and address.


Someone needs to review it and stay behind it's quality, so that people 
can be sure it's all good for them.
Reviewing process is for that, so in a sense of community effort you 
can't be "your own boss" and more important "on your own site". There is 
already site and it is openindiana.org. One place to look for a project 
not a 'quadrillion' different ones, when talking about ease of 
contribution and project existance.




A project is not defined by where it hosts it's code, docs, etc.


Sure documentation is what defines a distribution. If it is not on OI's 
servers, there is no OI, but number of not connected efforts, 
distributed across internet and that is not what the project is.


OI can't depend on someone's personal wits wither he/she should one day 
delete external contents or manage it or should it be available under 
OI's documentation license.


Questions of documentation are deeply representing software distribution 
itself and as I see this this represent non coordination and not reusing 
existing docs and is pulling in wrong direction.


If one spends enough time doing something alone, then it becomes non 
maintainable.
Same thing is with making processes better. One can always spend 3 years 
in basement doing something in separate way, but it's not needed.




Besides, why re-invent the wheel?


Exactly. Just use Opensolaris docs and see if you can improve on them. 
Do it publicly and loudly so you are not alone at any moment working on 
them.
There is already a process in transforming them and if it is needed to 
be refreshed it's ok.


Writing new articles all over again, just to be "different licensed" 
does not sounds like a effort good spent.


There is Openindiana  Wiki for brand new (possibly awesome) articles.
wiki.openindiana.org

Github is out there and many projects (much larger than OI) are using 
it to their full advantage. For an example, go have a look at the 
Jenkins project.


Depending on any external site - is a phase for many small projects: OI 
is not intending to being a small project.
We generally don't need Github for documentation, when we have our own 
servers. Why using something less good in a sense of project existence, 
and leave it to external entity to depend upon?



All contributions to OI's docs must follow it's license and can't be
re-licensed (Marguger asked weither he can re-license Opensolaris docs
to some other docs, answer is:no.


Licensing is something which should be discussed further. 


No it can't be discussed, since there is a mountain of Opensolaris 
documentation already licensed and it must be followed to be extended. 
It is what is required to follow in order to help OI's documentation.

http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/
http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/2009.06/pdl_version_101.pdf

In particular we should talk about what we need to do to ensure we're 
in compliance with whatever license applies to each work.


We don't need wasting time in applying license on each work.
There is contributor agreement that covers contribution to Openindiana 
project, the same as Sun did and it allows re-using any contributed work.
it's simple, it's efficient, easy to understand why it needs to exist 
(so project can use it as pleased and not bragging about every single 
contribution mention)  and surely any non-derived work author can re-use 
it too, no matter what agreement he/she signed, If that answers tour 
question of re-licensing your work.




That said I am not convinced the PDL should be applied to new works 
that do not contain any previously PDL licensed content. New works 
could for example use an MIT license.


New work is interesting area. It comes from conclusion that nothing else 
exists
(it surely does, http://dlc.openindiana.org/docs/2009.06/ , 
http://wiki.openindiana.org)

and that the author is smartest person in the world to do something new.

It is surely good to try something new, but to have Openindiana name on 
it, it must
- go through review process , - include existing docs and - be hosted on 
openindiana.org.




A copy of the PDL license is hosted along with the books here: 
http://makruger.github.io/website/pages/books/pdl.html


This is not OI official location and will never be... Please don't paste 

Re: [oi-dev] demonstration docs website

[Nikola M]

On 05/ 1/16 06:30 AM, Michael Kruger wrote:

Hello all,

Here is a little something I have been working to help showcase 
documentation for the OpenIndiana project.


Currently hosted are:

OpenIndiana FAQ (Complete, but still growing and improving)
OpenIndiana Handbook (little more than a template at this point)
OpenSolaris Books (41 titles from the 2009 redistributable docs release)

All of this resides on github, so further evolution of this website 
and it's content simply follows existing development practices.


Here is the URL: http://makruger.github.io/website/


I would like you have been doing this not alone, but within Openindiana 
community and cooperation with others, with announcing it here.


Also using Openindiana brand name outside openindiana.org for site names 
(like .ninja etc) is not good, since it is where search engines might 
forward people and that lowers openindiana.org rank.


All Openindiana infrastructure things can be easily covered within OI's 
infrastructure, regarding the need for test sites, GIT repositories, and 
in-development documentation hosting.


All contributions to OI's docs must follow it's license and can't be 
re-licensed (Marguger asked weither he can re-license Opensolaris docs 
to some other docs, answer is:no.
That includes contributor agreement, now to OI, so that documentation 
dos not need nor should include any personal "Copyright" notices, except 
CVS logs and contributor notes.


So this should be hosted on openindiana.org.
and "© The OpenIndiana Project 2016 - All Rights Reserved" is invalid 
and is not valid open documentation license, even someone could argue it 
actually represent accepting contributor agreement, but I suggest to 
also use standard documentation license so it could be reused like 
Opensolaris docs can be used because of that.
There is also reason why Opensolaris docs are made in XML using XML 
editing applications, so we can easily have html and PDF versions of any 
docs, using existing tools.


You should check and consult with someone before moving with this. Doing 
it alone is never good as it doesn't represent OI as a community product 
and more heads are always smarted then one. :)
If doing alone after it grows, it gets harder to fix issues and then you 
used to complain that there are too many issues and changes with your 
texts. That is normal to have issues :)



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] issues with dir action in IPS

[Nikola M]

On 04/19/16 01:00 AM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
So, it seems natural to have single service to automate 
post-installation tasks. In OpenSolaris/OI we had such service for the 
long time, system/postrun:default. Unfortunately, it had a lot of 
lu-upgrade-related legacy, and I suppose wasn't usable last several 
years on OI (and so was dropped). What do you think about recreating 
similar service, which would execute once generic scripts, delivered 
by packages?


I see two issues: 1) this defeats IPS no-scripting approach :), 2) 
there can be difficulties with non-active images...


If there already were system/postrun:default , why not to be there again 
I suppose.


I would also like to hear more input from someone else regarding 
no-scripting philosophy in IPS.
I know that post-install action, and others, are reason for, say, dilos 
to use DEB packaging instead of IPS. IPS itself is upstream derived from 
Oracle but it also is not written in the stone and unchangable.


But I am worried why would there be problems with non-active image?
(if I do actions on mounted image and not one that is default for boot 
with beadm activate as i understand).  If there is no problem about this 
or is avoided, I humbly see no reason why system/postrun:default 
shouldn't be there.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] [CFR] kvmadm need testers

[Nikola M]

On 03/22/16 11:11 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:

Alexander Pyhalov писал 23.03.2016 01:07:

Hello. Currently I don't have server installations suitable for
testing KVM, so I need testers.



And binary package is here:
pkg://userland/system/qemu/kvmadm@0.10.3,5.11-2015.0.2.0:20160322T221009Z 
at http://buildzone.oi-build.r61.net:1000/


illumos KVM from joyent requires Intel CPU with EPT instruction to work.
https://wiki.smartos.org/display/DOC/Hardware+Requirements#HardwareRequirements-KVMRequirements 

There is unfinished variant running on VT-only and AMD CPUs but is 
unfinished.

ATM I personally don't have Intel EPT CPU to test.

I have added manual for testing with mirroring and installing 
per-packages on this Wiki page:

http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Testing+packages+by+using+local+per-package+mirror

See if package version differs from already installed package:
pkg list | grep newpackagename

Make new *local mirror* publisher, populate it with testing package(s) 
and start *pkg.depotd* for serving packages: (assuming 
_/export/home/share/oi-userland_ for mirror files location; *pkgrecv -r* 
recursively mirrors required packages.


mkdir /export/home/share/oi-userland
pfexec beadm create hipster-backup

pkgrepo create /export/home/share/oi-userland
pkgrepo set -s /export/home/share/oi-userland/ publisher/prefix=userland
pkgrecv -s http://buildzone.oi-build.r61.net:1000/ -d 
/export/home/share/oi-userland -r newpackagename

pkgrepo refresh -p userland -s /export/home/share/oi-userland
/usr/lib/pkg.depotd -d /export/home/share/oi-userland -p 1

And adding new publisher to global zone and other linked-image *zones* 
and install packages for testing: (assuming zone location in 
_/zones/build/zone1_)


pfexec pkg set-publisher -g http://localhost:1 userland
pfexec pkg -R /zones/build/zone1/root/ set-publisher -g 
http://localhost:1 userland


pfexec pkg uninstall entire userland-incorporation
pfexec pkg install newpackagename

Feel free to share your findings on use *#oi-dev* IRC channel 
 on Freenode.net, *oi-dev* 
Openindiana mailing list 
and Openindiana 
issues bug database .


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] glib changes review

[Nikola M]

On 03/11/16 09:15 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:
Here's the new version : 
https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/compare/Openindiana:oi/hipster...pyhalov:pfexec


What is changed:
- now we use pfexec to run brasero and sound juicer;
- we don't care if user runs with EUID 0, it's his own difficulties;
so far this works with sudo, but fails (for brasero only) with 
su/pfexec, when user have Primary Administrator profile (just don't 
use Primary Administrator, it's insane));

- we restrict privileges to basic_privs,sys_devices.

What is changed from user perspective:
- brasero/sound juicer will work in default configurations when run 
from menu;
- if  you have Primary Administrator profile, brasero will not work 
when run from menu.


Needs some more testing (so far didn't try to write CDs, just looked 
at ppriv output).
This is _not sane_, "solution" nor acceptable to make Primary 
Administrator an invalide because there are bugs somewhere elese, in Glib.
I would rather sopundjuicer/brasero NOT working as user if Primary 
administrator can't do that task.


Primary Administrator can be used to test does some functionality works 
and see exactly where bugs are and this bug is as said in Glib and Not 
elsewhere, so untill it is fixed, it is better not to make things worse 
untill then.  PA should do _anything_ so not being able to do _anything_ 
is very huge bug by itself.
Not introducing bigger bug, please, to solve another one is very 
appretiated.


Primary Administrator is not selected by default Atm and it is enough to 
say that it is not to be used for everyday tasks, without attacking it's 
existence.


Ideally, command should work as described as Desktop user (not every 
user) should be able to write optical media and read from it for some 
tasks (Even if making new RBAC role for it) and that is where roles come 
to play, but without affecting the rest of the system sanity.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] new year

[Nikola M]

On 01/14/16 09:15 AM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote:

Hi.
What do you think about naming conventions?
We currently have 2015.0.2.X package version to mark RELEASE_MAJOR and 
UPDATENUM . I think we'll preserve them until new snapshot (which will 
become 2016.0.0.X). 
I think it is much better to have Release.X.Y..Z where Release is the 
name of the OI snapshot that is supposedly to land into and replace /dev.
Also i don't see any point of having package names like 
Packageversion.X.Y.Z but it is better to have 
Release.X.Y.Z.Packageversion, because leaving package/program upstream 
(or local) release version behind distribution release versions can help 
installing older version back into OI if newer updated one has some 
unresolved bug, to help kep quality level.


Question of OI hipster snapshot and release names and packages names are 
connected with the plan
of landing into /dev and having delevopment and testing going on in both 
hipster and /dev.


/dev can be made out of hipster snapshots, with more testing and not 
including everything that is inside the hipster, due to quality control. 
Hipster would continue out of that purged /dev, so that every current 
hipster is the state of development in between two /dev releases, with 
quality control purge at every /dev.
Re-adding purged packages and working on them can be done in hipster 
after /dev.


It is just important that after first update of /dev , made out of 
hipster, hipster development is made out of that new /dev , so that it 
is more easy to update from one /dev to the next /dev , that most of 
people outside use and send bug reports and RFEs for.



What about repository name?
Initially multiple repositories were created to avoid having 
repositories with too many packages, as this slows down IPS.


Any repository name for hipster is good enough and having fresh built 
hipster in the new year (all packages freshly rebuit) with new 
repository name is a good workaround for slowing down of IPS.


Now we usually pkgsend/pkgrecv repository to temporary place and move 
back. So  I don't think /hipster- repositories  are necessary or 
convenient. Perhaps, it's a good idea to move repository to /hipster 
and preserve it there?


We already had /hipster and I suppose there are instalaltions of 
/hipster somewhere and that would open the case of testing updating form 
/hipster to /hipster-2016...
I think that having per-year hipster repository with freshly compiled 
and clean repository at the beginning of the year is best solution 
because of IPS slowdowns after many changes.


If /dev is updated with hipster, then at that moment /hipster would 
start being tortched and clean-built anyway, following /dev release in 
between /dev's.
At that moment, hipster would be single place of development with no 
reason to be named by-year, yes.
As I see it, To develop on OI, one would install from latest /dev ISO, 
update to latest /dev release, change repository to /hipster, update and 
get newest development environment en route to next /dev.
That way update from one /dev to the current state of hipster would be 
test for the next /dev and keep it working.



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] [OpenIndiana-discuss] OpenSolaris

[Nikola M]

On 01/ 9/16 04:09 PM, Aurélien Larcher wrote:

Hi Martin,

The sole fact that only 4 persons showed happiness that Inetl-KMS
now works on Illumos.
No - cannot beieve there are only 4 folks who waited for this.


Your frustration is more than legitimate considering your dedication.

Regarding your work on Intel KMS it is indeed important to get more 
people to provide testing and feedback.
Maybe Nikola at least will be able to do so but it would be nice to 
expand the circle ;)


Sure I have 2 machines to test it and as usual personal things got in 
it's path. Will do testing.


Fact that /dev have not been updated for such a long time is sole reason 
for nog having more people around.
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] R.I.P: Ian Murdock got murdered by USA-"Police"

[Nikola M]

On 01/ 6/16 07:49 AM, Мартин Бохниг wrote:
*Ian Murdock ,* a 
programmer and founder of DEBorah-IAN and I-nd-IA-a whose achievements 
are too many to list, "committed suicide" after being beaten 
and raped by the Police.


Here his absolutely shocking tweets  :

https://archive.is/cPE6h



There is also topic on openindiana-discuss list about this. It is 
obvious to me that normal people do Not comit "suicide" After police get 
their hands on them.


This is the reminder of need for tighten connections between people and 
organizations, so that no one is left behind and is protected by 
community of people who care and have channels of independently 
expressing and direct real lines of help.


___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Re: [oi-dev] R.I.P: Ian Murdock got murdered by USA-"Police"

[Nikola M]

On 01/ 6/16 01:07 PM, Мартин Бохниг wrote:


I am absolutely in SHOCK  :



Please Martin, sorry to hear the news, but let's have list stay 
on-topic. Thank you a lot!



___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev