Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
We do not (and have never) searched the known Universe for possible conflicts that may possibly live in somebody's home directory. They're just not relevant, no matter what time/date stamp might be on that file. You're asking for us to be reasonable, so I think we should ask the same in return: I don't think it's at all reasonable to block the project that's moving /usr/sfw/bin/compare to /usr/bin/compare on the theoretical problem that somebody, someday, maybe, might want to integrate some other program that happens to install with the same name. Under that theory, there are essentially an arbitrary number of conflicts -- because we don't have the history of the world right at hand. James, you make good points. Certainly nobody can search every nook and cranny or know what is in someone's head. However, this particular scenario is specific because a conflict was brought to attention. The crucial question is this: is the PSARC / ARC / whatever you want to call it -- let's call it the process so *rigid* and so *inflexible* that, even when someone external reports a conflict, nothing can be done about it? I mean, does the process need to looked at and revised, or are we dealing with an emotional factor here as well? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
James, you make good points. Certainly nobody can search every nook and cranny or know what is in someone's head. However, this particular scenario is specific because a conflict was brought to attention. The crucial question is this: is the PSARC / ARC / whatever you want to call it -- let's call it the process so *rigid* and so *inflexible* that, even when someone external reports a conflict, nothing can be done about it? I mean, does the process need to looked at and revised, or are we dealing with an emotional factor here as well? The ARC looked at the information given to it and decided that retaining compatibility around the ImageMagick command names (that had been shipped before in SFW, and exist as such on many other platforms on which the ImageMagick tools are available) was more important than reserving a piece of the namespace for a command that was (and is) not even on track to being integrated. I see no rigidity nor lack of flexibility here. Bart ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem? I'm not making it personal. I don't see how you read that into what I wrote. I was just applying what I understand (now) the process to be to the example someone else asked about. Then I must have missunderstood you - sorry. It seems that this is just to pretend it is less important than it really is. The general problem is that conflicting names cannot be in /usr/bin in order to avoid problems that cannot be solved by changing PATH. Please do not try to divert from this general problem. I'm with you there. I don't remember the ARC case # (I think it was the creation of /usr/gnu), but I actually argued the same thing on the conference call. I think the only difference is that When I hung up from the conf. call, I understood that while my argument was heard and understood, it wasn't deemed to be enough to change things, and I knew they decided to go ahead anyway. Ao I wasn't surprised when the gnu binaries appeared in /usr/bin. Well, then we seem to have very similar ideas. A big question still remains: what is GNU software and should non-gnu software go to /usr/gnu? Some people could argue that everything that uses the GPL could go into /usr/gnu, others could argue that only software published by the FSF has this right. If you limit the software to software from the FSF, you are sure that there are no name clashes in /usr/gnu/ if you allos any GPLd software to live there, even /usr/gnu could have a potential name clash risk. The important conclusion from the current name clash problem should be: - Only a small selected number of binaries are allowed to live (also) in /usr/gnu. This would include gtar, cc and gcc but it may be that we even need to discuss whether tar, pax and similar should be there. - As long as even in a multi-user environment users cannot customize their private view to /usr/bin, /usr/bin needs to be treated very carefully. - Instead of putting everything into /usr/bin, it is better to have a longer PATH by default that defines the default behavior of the installation (e.g. from /etc/default/login) - It may be even wise to create something like /usr/sun/bin or /usr/sol/bin to really allow to customize the userland behavior of OpenSolaris. - The current state is an intermediate development state that does not grant stability, so any change is still possible as long as Solaris 11 has not been published. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Bart Blanquart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ARC looked at the information given to it and decided that retaining compatibility around the ImageMagick command names (that had been shipped before in SFW, and exist as such on many other platforms on which the ImageMagick tools are available) was more important than reserving a piece of the namespace for a command that was (and is) not even on track to being integrated. I see no rigidity nor lack of flexibility here. Then you should read my mail and try to understand the problem Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
UNIX admin writes: The crucial question is this: is the PSARC / ARC / whatever you want to call it -- let's call it the process so *rigid* and so *inflexible* that, even when someone external reports a conflict, nothing can be done about it? There's no conflict. Nobody (not even Joerg) has ever suggested that his implementation of compare would ever be integrated into OpenSolaris. No proposal has ever been made; not even a suggestion. If such a proposal were made, we would do the obvious things: look at how it fits with the rest of the system, and explore the alternatives. Does the world really need both /usr/bin/cmp and /usr/bin/joerg-compare? Why? If all it provides is better file comparisons then either (a) it might go better as a /usr/bin/cmp replacement or (b) nobody cares. The only problem we have is a utility of unknown usefulness that has never been proposed for integration into any OpenSolaris consolidation. That should not pose a roadblock to a project team that's doing something *useful* for OpenSolaris: I consider cleaning up the /usr/sfw/bin ghetto to be a useful task. I know you chided me earlier for being a bit provincial in saying that things outside OpenSolaris don't exist, but this is exactly the situation I was talking about. I see no reason to suppose that Joerg's claim to /usr/bin/compare is at all important to any OpenSolaris user. I'm certainly willing to be argued the other way on that (are there in fact any users?), but I simply don't see it; particularly so when nobody has seen fit to try to integrate it. All that I've seen so far is pointless complaining, wild accusations, and claims that everything's broken. I'd much rather see project proposals, but I'm very much doubting that'll happen. I mean, does the process need to looked at and revised, or are we dealing with an emotional factor here as well? I think it's purely the latter. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[Please refrain from copying me on these mails; I, like everyone involved, am on this mailing list] On 20 Dec 2007, at 13:19, Joerg Schilling wrote: Bart Blanquart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ARC looked at the information given to it and decided that retaining compatibility around the ImageMagick command names (that had been shipped before in SFW, and exist as such on many other platforms on which the ImageMagick tools are available) was more important than reserving a piece of the namespace for a command that was (and is) not even on track to being integrated. I see no rigidity nor lack of flexibility here. Then you should read my mail and try to understand the problem I've read your mails and I fail to see a problem in what the ARC has decided. So, would you be so kind as to indulge me and explain clearly what is overly rigid or shows a lack of flexibility in the ARC making a decision based on the information it had, which was: 1) /usr/sfw/bin/compare had already shipped, so the compare name had already been used (on Solaris); 2) ImageMagick's compare seems to be the most commonly used compare command; 3) there is precedent on permitting moves from /usr/sfw to /usr/bin if this causes no naming clash within the context of Solaris; 4) there was (and is) not even a proposal for your compare command to get integrated, so #3 stands. The names of commands that exist outside of the Solaris context matter little. They do matter in so far that they can be considered by the ARC to avoid gratuitous naming discrepancies as well as naming clashes with common commands out there. The ARC has the flexibility to decide one way or the other, based on what the ARC members consider to be the most useful approach for Solaris. Bart ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert
a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem?
I'm not making it personal. I don't see how you read that into what I
wrote. I was just applying what I understand (now) the process to be to
the example someone else asked about.
Then I must have missunderstood you - sorry.
It seems that this is just to pretend it is less important than it really
is.
The general problem is that conflicting names cannot be in /usr/bin in
order
to avoid problems that cannot be solved by changing PATH. Please do not try
to
divert from this general problem.
I'm with you there. I don't remember the ARC case # (I think it was the
creation of /usr/gnu), but I actually argued the same thing on the
conference call. I think the only difference is that When I hung up from
the conf. call, I understood that while my argument was heard and
understood, it wasn't deemed to be enough to change things, and I knew
they decided to go ahead anyway. Ao I wasn't surprised when the gnu
binaries appeared in /usr/bin.
Well, then we seem to have very similar ideas.
A big question still remains: what is GNU software and should non-gnu
software go to /usr/gnu?
That (If I recall correctly) was one of the questions raised on the
conference call and email thread. I was never clear why that was a good
reason not to do it but it was a variable some didn't appear to like.
Personally I'd only put in the FSF stuff - but that left another
questions, that I think some didn't want hanging out there, to answer:
Where does the other stuff go? How big does a collection have to be to
get it's own /usr/gnu equivalent? is there a /usr/misc that collects all
the things that don't qualify? Should all these collections be collected
in another directory (/usr/some/path/{gnu,schilly,misc,...})? Should the
gnu equivalents of things already in /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, /usr/xpg*, be
left in /usr/gnu since they could be considered 'UNIX types', but things
not traditionally in UNIX (gcc, ghostscript, xemacs, etc.) put in
/usr/some/path/somename?
I don't know the answers to all therse questions. I beleive they are
answerable, but I know Sun had a timetable, and probably didn't want to
hold up that one ARC case to hashing out this bigger problem.
Looking at it now, the answers to those questions probably seemed to
lead right back to something too close to /usr/sfw... I know there are
opinions out there that /usr/sfw was a mistake. I'm not totally clear on
what they didn't like about it technically, but I think I might try to
look it up if I get the chance.
The important conclusion from the current name clash problem should be:
- Only a small selected number of binaries are allowed to live (also) in
/usr/gnu. This would include gtar, cc and gcc but it may be that we even
need to discuss whether tar, pax and similar should be there.
I think the /usr/gnu case decided only things that were GNU (FSF I
bleieve) that *conflicted* with things already in /usr/bin were to be
put in /usr/gnu. This means that you might find GNU tar under the name
tar in /usr/gnu, and again under the name gtar in /usr/bin, but you
wouldn't find gtar in /usr/gnu. GCC would be found in /usr/bin I assume
ince I know of no conflict.
- As long as even in a multi-user environment users cannot customize
their
private view to /usr/bin, /usr/bin needs to be treated very carefully.
The idea was to leave /usr/bin as the default catchall. And allow people
to stick things in front of it in their PATH to bring conflicting thins
from GNU, UCB, XPG etc. to the front for themselves, and let the PATH
'fall through' to pick up everything else by default.
- Instead of putting everything into /usr/bin, it is better to have a
longer PATH by default that defines the default behavior of the
installation (e.g. from /etc/default/login)
There are hard and fast rules inside of Sun, from experiences with
customers (from what I remember) complaining when the default PATH had
been changed in the past. No one was willing to discuss changing the
default PATH in /etc/default/login.
- It may be even wise to create something like /usr/sun/bin or
/usr/sol/bin
to really allow to customize the userland behavior of OpenSolaris.
I think that might also be a good idea. If /usr/bin is to be a catchall,
then like UCB, and XPG, I think breaking out the SVR4 variants of the
'basic UNIX' commands (getting everyone to agree on a definition of that
list might be tough) might be useful too. Even if it's only to Put all
'environment flavors' on equal footing. But I think that would involve
touching the default PATH, and that was described as a 'non-starter'.
- The current state is an
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Kyle McDonald writes: Joerg Schilling wrote: A big question still remains: what is GNU software and should non-gnu software go to /usr/gnu? That (If I recall correctly) was one of the questions raised on the conference call and email thread. I was never clear why that was a good reason not to do it but it was a variable some didn't appear to like. Personally I'd only put in the FSF stuff - but that left another questions, that I think some didn't want hanging out there, to answer: There is no need to pretend as though this were an open question: the issue was specified _exactly_ in PSARC 2007/047 (/usr/gnu), and we insisted that, as a directory in /usr/gnu, it must have a precise definition. That is: For the purposes of determining candidates for the GNU environment, the GNU packages of the FSF/UNESCO Free Software Directory are considered the authoritative list [2]. [...] [2] Free Software Foundation, FSF/UNESCO Free Software Directory, All GNU Packages, 2006 (http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/). That's the list. It's not a mystery. Where does the other stuff go? How big does a collection have to be to get it's own /usr/gnu equivalent? is there a /usr/misc that collects all These things were *also* discussed at length during the case review. I don't know the answers to all therse questions. I beleive they are answerable, but I know Sun had a timetable, and probably didn't want to hold up that one ARC case to hashing out this bigger problem. Untrue. We held that exact discussion. I think the /usr/gnu case decided only things that were GNU (FSF I bleieve) that *conflicted* with things already in /usr/bin were to be put in /usr/gnu. This means that you might find GNU tar under the name tar in /usr/gnu, and again under the name gtar in /usr/bin, but you wouldn't find gtar in /usr/gnu. Correct. GCC would be found in /usr/bin I assume ince I know of no conflict. It'd be reasonable to have GCC as /usr/gnu/bin/cc, if someone wanted it. There are hard and fast rules inside of Sun, from experiences with customers (from what I remember) complaining when the default PATH had been changed in the past. No one was willing to discuss changing the default PATH in /etc/default/login. This ground, as well as the long term effects of putting random open source stuff in /usr/bin, has been trampled extensively. I'm somewhat sympathetic to the complaints that we're treating /usr/bin as a dumping ground. I _wasn't_ in favor of the plan. To a large extent, it's driven by earlier decisions -- most notably the decision to use GNOME as a desktop. However, it's long since been decided, and the discussion issues that you've raised here -- repeatedly -- are really pointless. They don't result in any useful changes or shine any light on the problem. If you're really interested in changing this, rather than just contributing to the debating society, then I urge you to put together a project proposal. Propose something concrete that will alter or abolish these decisions, and put something more to your liking in place: PSARC 1999/555 Getting with the Freeware Program PSARC 2005/185 Enabling serendipitous discovery PSARC 2007/047 /usr/gnu Otherwise, given the previous clear decisions, our choices on these new cases become quite clear. You might not like ImageMagick in /usr/bin, but given our current direction, it's an entirely proper and consistent decision. For what it's worth, I've made my peace with those decisions. There are aspects I don't like, but there's more that I *do* like, so even if someone complains that having everything easily accessible is too much like Linux, I'm not picking up that fight. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
James Carlson wrote: Kyle McDonald writes: I don't know the answers to all therse questions. I beleive they are answerable, but I know Sun had a timetable, and probably didn't want to hold up that one ARC case to hashing out this bigger problem. Untrue. We held that exact discussion. It was discussed, but I got the (perhaps wrong?) impression that final path chosen dended up not needing answers to those questions, and so I was never sure how set in stone the possible answers to those questions really were at the end of that discussion. I thought one of the reasons for going the route chosen was that it avoided many if not all of those quesitons. I think the /usr/gnu case decided only things that were GNU (FSF I bleieve) that *conflicted* with things already in /usr/bin were to be put in /usr/gnu. This means that you might find GNU tar under the name tar in /usr/gnu, and again under the name gtar in /usr/bin, but you wouldn't find gtar in /usr/gnu. Correct. GCC would be found in /usr/bin I assume ince I know of no conflict. It'd be reasonable to have GCC as /usr/gnu/bin/cc, if someone wanted it. True if it is called 'cc'. I was thinking of a binary called 'gcc' and trying to use that as an example to show Joerg what i was talking about. There are hard and fast rules inside of Sun, from experiences with customers (from what I remember) complaining when the default PATH had been changed in the past. No one was willing to discuss changing the default PATH in /etc/default/login. This ground, as well as the long term effects of putting random open source stuff in /usr/bin, has been trampled extensively. I'm somewhat sympathetic to the complaints that we're treating /usr/bin as a dumping ground. I _wasn't_ in favor of the plan. To a large extent, it's driven by earlier decisions -- most notably the decision to use GNOME as a desktop. However, it's long since been decided, and the discussion issues that you've raised here -- repeatedly -- are really pointless. They don't result in any useful changes or shine any light on the problem. Aggreed. Case closed. I wasn't looking to discuss them again. Just pointing them out to Joerg in case it wasn't clear. I thought maybe my interpretation could clear it up. If you're really interested in changing this, rather than just contributing to the debating society, then I urge you to put together a project proposal. Propose something concrete that will alter or abolish these decisions, and put something more to your liking in place: PSARC 1999/555 Getting with the Freeware Program PSARC 2005/185 Enabling serendipitous discovery PSARC 2007/047 /usr/gnu I might. If I had what I beleived were good answers to all the other questions I listed above. I think good answers exist, but I haven't found them yet. That's exactly what I was trying to say. I haven't avoided dicussing it since I'm hoping that good ideas might come to someone else on these lists even though I haven't found them myself. Otherwise, given the previous clear decisions, our choices on these new cases become quite clear. You might not like ImageMagick in /usr/bin, but given our current direction, it's an entirely proper and consistent decision. Aggreed. I'm not trying to say anything otherwise. In fact I thought I said that to Joerg. I was trying to say that while he and I may have some visions of how it would be 'ideally' that are nearly parallel, our take on how it is is totally opposite. I feel that liek you have said when it came down to the case of 'compare' wether you look at the 'First to Integrate' rule, or the 'more popular, more useful' rule, Imagemagik wins. I'd take ImageMagik in a heartbeat over his compare. For what it's worth, I've made my peace with those decisions. There are aspects I don't like, but there's more that I *do* like, so even if someone complains that having everything easily accessible is too much like Linux, I'm not picking up that fight. I don't like them either, but for the time being I'm made my peace too, and I'm learning to live with it until I come up with something else that I feel is worth proposing. The 'Been there. Discussed that. Don't want to revisit it.' attitude makes it hard for people like me to even consider proposeing something unless we feel it will address (nearly?) every concern everyone who will need to approve it will have. And coming up with that checklist to verify against before proposing it is tough. Though I'm sure the case materials contain a good start. There's just this aurora of we don't want to waste time on this again no matter how good an idea you have about this subject. -Kyle ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as `gtar`, was it? And whoever integrated it didn't get the developers/maintainers of GNU tar to rename him (the GNU tape archiver), did they? I don't see why we should rename something because of a conflict with something we do not ship. You probably (I hope) didn't mean this the way you wrote it, because it comes off as: if we don't ship it, it doesn't exist and, just because (Open)Solaris isn't shipping something today, that does not mean it won't be shipping that something tomorrow, which is why I believe you probably didn't mean it that way; the way you put it is unfortunate. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
UNIX admin writes: If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as `gtar`, was it? No, because 'gtar' is a well-known disambiguator (even the GNU tar sources search for tar as 'gnutar' and 'gtar') that predates our use, and because we have /usr/gnu/bin for those few who really want tar to live with GNU horns. There's no such variation of the ImageMagick components that will work or that will be compatible with other platforms. And whoever integrated it didn't get the developers/maintainers of GNU tar to rename him (the GNU tape archiver), did they? That's true; that wasn't done because there already was a well-known solution so no special concerns were raised. I don't see why we should rename something because of a conflict with something we do not ship. You probably (I hope) didn't mean this the way you wrote it, because it comes off as: if we don't ship it, it doesn't exist and, just because (Open)Solaris isn't shipping something today, that does not mean it won't be shipping that something tomorrow, which is why I believe you probably didn't mean it that way; the way you put it is unfortunate. To an approximation, if it's not something that has been ARC reviewed and integrated, then it's not a conflict. We can't solve all the world's conflicts; we have to worry about ours. Obviously, if someone wanted to ship his own version of some well- known program that we don't currently ship, or otherwise pick a famous name, we'd likely have some sharp questions to ask, but in terms of having a conflict requiring that utility to be placed in /usr/gnu/bin (or some such), I think we'd be in less obvious territory. In this case, though, LSARC discussed something that was already reviewed and already integrated into the /usr/sfw/bin ghetto, something that is commonly known and used on many other platforms, and the project team wanted to move it over to /usr/bin. Per the rules we came up with in PSARC 2005/185 (Enabling serendipitous discovery) and 2007/047 (/usr/gnu), they were doing something that was fairly obvious and good, and the LSARC members agreed with them. I happen to agree with LSARC. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
James Carlson wrote: UNIX admin writes: If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. That is not the approach that was taken when GNU tar was integrated as `gtar`, was it? No, because 'gtar' is a well-known disambiguator (even the GNU tar sources search for tar as 'gnutar' and 'gtar') that predates our use, and because we have /usr/gnu/bin for those few who really want tar to live with GNU horns. Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a 'tar' in /usr/bin. When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'. -Kyle There's no such variation of the ImageMagick components that will work or that will be compatible with other platforms. And whoever integrated it didn't get the developers/maintainers of GNU tar to rename him (the GNU tape archiver), did they? That's true; that wasn't done because there already was a well-known solution so no special concerns were raised. I don't see why we should rename something because of a conflict with something we do not ship. You probably (I hope) didn't mean this the way you wrote it, because it comes off as: if we don't ship it, it doesn't exist and, just because (Open)Solaris isn't shipping something today, that does not mean it won't be shipping that something tomorrow, which is why I believe you probably didn't mean it that way; the way you put it is unfortunate. To an approximation, if it's not something that has been ARC reviewed and integrated, then it's not a conflict. We can't solve all the world's conflicts; we have to worry about ours. Obviously, if someone wanted to ship his own version of some well- known program that we don't currently ship, or otherwise pick a famous name, we'd likely have some sharp questions to ask, but in terms of having a conflict requiring that utility to be placed in /usr/gnu/bin (or some such), I think we'd be in less obvious territory. In this case, though, LSARC discussed something that was already reviewed and already integrated into the /usr/sfw/bin ghetto, something that is commonly known and used on many other platforms, and the project team wanted to move it over to /usr/bin. Per the rules we came up with in PSARC 2005/185 (Enabling serendipitous discovery) and 2007/047 (/usr/gnu), they were doing something that was fairly obvious and good, and the LSARC members agreed with them. I happen to agree with LSARC. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a 'tar' in /usr/bin. When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'. Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem? It seems that this is just to pretend it is less important than it really is. The general problem is that conflicting names cannot be in /usr/bin in order to avoid problems that cannot be solved by changing PATH. Please do not try to divert from this general problem. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling writes: Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a 'tar' in /usr/bin. When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'. Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem? It seems that this is just to pretend it is less important than it really is. The general problem is that conflicting names cannot be in /usr/bin in order to avoid problems that cannot be solved by changing PATH. Please do not try to divert from this general problem. But there's no such conflict. We do not (and have never) searched the known Universe for possible conflicts that may possibly live in somebody's home directory. They're just not relevant, no matter what time/date stamp might be on that file. You're asking for us to be reasonable, so I think we should ask the same in return: I don't think it's at all reasonable to block the project that's moving /usr/sfw/bin/compare to /usr/bin/compare on the theoretical problem that somebody, someday, maybe, might want to integrate some other program that happens to install with the same name. Under that theory, there are essentially an arbitrary number of conflicts -- because we don't have the history of the world right at hand. The conflict exists if there's a name established somewhere in the OpenSolaris realm. If there is no such name, then there's no conflict, and we're down to just evaluating potential choices. At that level, and considering the relative popularity of ImageMagick, it seems like the right choice was made. You might not like that answer, but belaboring it and purposefully insulting the people involved when the decision has been explained in excruciating detail really isn't doing you any good. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not to mention that when Gnu tar was integrated, Solaris already had a 'tar' in /usr/bin. When 'compare' was integrated (by the first one to request it,) Solaris had nothing in /usr/bin/ named 'compare'. Could you please explain why some people including you try to convert a general problem (that I mentioned some time ago) into a personal problem? I'm not making it personal. I don't see how you read that into what I wrote. I was just applying what I understand (now) the process to be to the example someone else asked about. It seems that this is just to pretend it is less important than it really is. The general problem is that conflicting names cannot be in /usr/bin in order to avoid problems that cannot be solved by changing PATH. Please do not try to divert from this general problem. I'm with you there. I don't remember the ARC case # (I think it was the creation of /usr/gnu), but I actually argued the same thing on the conference call. I think the only difference is that When I hung up from the conf. call, I understood that while my argument was heard and understood, it wasn't deemed to be enough to change things, and I knew they decided to go ahead anyway. Ao I wasn't surprised when the gnu binaries appeared in /usr/bin. I pushed for all gnu software to be installed in /usr/gnu, with an second (optional - but installed by default) package of soft links from /usr/gnu/to /usr/bin for the programs everyone wanted to put in /usr/bin. That way if I elected, I could use PATH for my users to allow them total flexibility, without changing the default for other installations who just expect everything to be there. I suppose a /usr/some/path/imagemagik/ could have been created where all the binaries are installed, and a imagmagik links pkg (again installed by default) could have been added also to make them appear in /usr/bin, but leave the admin installing the machine the option to remove them. I would think even that might have been good enough for you: a /usr/some/path/schilly/... instalation location for your stuff, with a second 'links' pkg (not installed by default, I would assume given Sun's view that Imagemagik.is more widely used.) but available for those who wanted to put your programs in /usr/bin. I imagine that Sun either didn't want to start a precendent for this, nor have to set criteria for what can and can't be have it's own /usr/some/path/SomeCollection directory. Still in my mind it's the only method that retains flexibility and scales(mostly.) This allows the admin to customize the machine defaults, without denying the users the ability to override the admins choices. And it still lets Sun keep it's 'serendipitous discovery' (is the right name?) policy alive. Seemed like it should have been win win, and covered all the requirements for everyone at the time, and I never felt that I heard a good reason not to do it. The focus of my argument was that I maintain a network of machines, where I need to build and install GNU and other tools myself, for various reasons the ones included in Solaris will never be good enough. I keep these apps on an NFS share, and therefore I don't want to put them in front of /usr/bin in PATH, but with these GNU (and other tools) integrated into /usr/bin, I'm forced to either prepend them to the PATH, or not install the corresponding Solaris packages. So far I've elected to not install the packages whenever possible, and that has worked for me so far. However I see the day coming when (because it's in Solaris now,) someone codes some other part of Solaris to depend on these programs, and not installing these packages won't be an option. I suppose I'll revisit the argument then. -Kyle Jörg ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Dec 15, 2007 1:28 PM, W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (It's a good feeling to know that the Solaris kernel has good genes. Another smiley.) Kernels don't have genes. -- Chris Mahan http://www.christophermahan.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell 818.943.1850 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
solid (It's a good feeling to know that the Solaris kernel has good genes. Another smiley.)/blockquote div /div divKernels don't have genes./div/divbrbr clear=allbr-- brChris Mahanbra href=http://www.christophermahan.com/;http://www.chr istophermahan.com//abra href=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] com /abra href=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] com/abrcell 818.943.1850 /div___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org But kernels are written by human beings, they inevitably manifest many of the traits of those who created them. . . I am sure there are a lot of resident Star Trek die-hards who will do a much better job explaining. But a couple of Sun's senior engineers have done a partial DNA sequencing on the Solaris kernel and published a 1000+ pages book: http://www.amazon.com/Solaris-Internals-TM-OpenSolaris-Architecture/dp/0131482092/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1197870652sr=1-2 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
But kernels are written by human beings, they inevitably manifest many of the traits of those who created them. . . I am sure there are a lot of resident Star Trek die-hards who will do a much better job explaining. But a couple of Sun's senior engineers have done a partial DNA sequencing on the Solaris kernel and published a 1000+ pages book: http://www.amazon.com/Solaris-Internals-TM-OpenSolaris-Architecture/dp/0131482092/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1197870652sr=1-2 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joseph Kowalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion: If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used in /usr/bin. Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions. Jörg Seriously: Could you cite the precedent for this assertion? Aside: I'm more than amused that historically the use of fully qualified paths and lengthy PATH settings was the norm for Unix and Solaris. Then BSD-4.2 even introduced a name conflict (2 different mail programs) that was solved via your PATH. But nearly 30 years ago, things have been much simpler than today. We had a long ARC discussion when the first /usr/sfw/bin - /usr/bin/ request came out and I wrote some text that explains expected problems from moving too much sw to /usr/bin. Several people that obviously did not grok the problem replied fast but there have been a few replies that looked as if my message was understood. At that time it was obvious to me that there is an agreement on only putting non-critical names into /usr/bin because this is the only way to allow people to control their envionment via PATH. /usr/bin/ on Solaris is a SVR4 dominated generic program store. Everything that is neither SVR4 nor generic needs to be in different directories unless you like to bnreak usability. My understanding of the ARC is that ARC is responsible for preventing problems. In out current case, a problem has been introduced by ingonring basic rules. came Linux, which seems to want to place everything into a single directory, because they liked it. It seems that many people prefer this in the interest if EOU. The cost of better EOU is often less available choices. Solaris has been slowly evolving to this model. Tell me again how the OSS world is the poster boy for resolving conflicts... I am not sure if you know that the Solaris users that survived the Sun crisis (which started around 1997) stayed with Solaris _because_ Solaris was well planned and did not suffer from the Linux probllems that now start to swamp Solaris too. If we like to keep these users, we cannot blindly follow mikstakes that have been introduced on Linux. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Garrett's Dad is obviously a very smart man. And Garrett seems to have learned from his Dad very well. He (Garrett) is a very successful contributor to ON and a (successful) role model that we would do well to emulate. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perhaps we should also ask another Solaris kernel developer Eric Schrock to quote what his dad might or might not have said. :-) As we all know, Dr. Richard Schrock is a very recent (2005) Nobel prize winner. (It's a good feeling to know that the Solaris kernel has good genes. Another smiley.) I have heard rumors that one of Sun's employees was/is being considered for the Nobel prize (for her contributions to the internet security). Don't know how that is progressing? Sorry for the interruption. Now back to the nonsense. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious Why would you conclude that? It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. I thinkt hat integrating open source projects as is is vastly more important than using names which could be used for other programs. As there I expect that the use of ImageMgick is quite a bit more widespread than your compare program, I don't see this as a serious issue. I don't see why we should rename something because of a conflict with something we do not ship. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious Why would you conclude that? It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name is thus illegal. Says who? And who keeps the record or registry? Things not in Solaris, BTW, are generally irrelevant to PSARC discussions. If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. They ignore mail. This is not fair! Life is not fair, get over it. Because if Sun does not rename the image magick program Sun verifies that PSARC discussions are just to fool people but do not have useful resaults. Remember Joerg, being listened to is NOT the same as getting your way. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems that PSARC discussions are not taken for serious Why would you conclude that? It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name is thus illegal. If you want to rename compare you will need to take this up with the ImageMagick folks. They ignore mail. This is not fair! I thinkt hat integrating open source projects as is is vastly more important than using names which could be used for other programs. As there I expect that the use of ImageMgick is quite a bit more widespread than your compare program, I don't see this as a serious issue. I don't see why we should rename something because of a conflict with something we do not ship. Because if Sun does not rename the image magick program Sun verifies that PSARC discussions are just to fool people but do not have useful resaults. Sun has the chance to verify that Sun for OpenSolaris is listening to it's community. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on OpenSolaris and not just ignorant domination from Sun. Let not argue your case by calling us ignorant! The point is imagemagik is integrated. It is not against any ARC rule in name space assignment. If indeed you have submitted an ARC earlier with the intention to integrate, ARC will definitely advise against the imagemagik case to rename or some sort. Do we have an OpenSolaris community or is this just a fake? What response might you get if you make the same proposal to other Linux community like ubuntu or fedora? Suggesting to them I have this 20 years old binary, however, it does not run in your distro, but I like to reserve the name. Do you think this is reasonable? You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion: If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used in /usr/bin. Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name is thus illegal. Says who? And who keeps the record or registry? Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick? compare as a word dates back to probably 1000BC when the latin language developed. Its use in english is post-norman, though, being imported from french, but even that makes the english word almost thousand years old. What, except a) that I was tortured with Latin in school, and b) that I can sound quite patronizing if I chose to, does that prove ? Generic words can't be trademarked. That's why everyone can call their stuff Windows, Microsoft lost a corresponding lawsuit a few years ago. You chose a simple english word, you can't claim exclusive rights to it. A prefix/suffix, schily_compare, or at least as you do it with the other utilities that you wrote, scompare, would come closer to trademark-able terms, as Apple/Intel are demonstrating with the iStuff. For name collisions, there's always PATH to sort out your preference. /usr/bin vs. /usr/ucb vs. /usr/xpg4/bin vs. /usr/xpg6/bin comes to mind. The world isn't out there to get you. Really. Btw, PSARC knows something like a minority vote. You can leave a record there saying you disagree with something, and state the reasons. Which is even possible if you're not a voting member. It goes on record and allows you righteousness later, you should've listened see what happened. Whether that's a useful thing to do is another question, but it's really going too far now ... FrankH. Because if Sun does not rename the image magick program Sun verifies that PSARC discussions are just to fool people but do not have useful resaults. Remember Joerg, being listened to is NOT the same as getting your way. It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on OpenSolaris and not just ignorant domination from Sun. Do we have an OpenSolaris community or is this just a fake? The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org -- No good can come from selling your freedom, not for all the gold in the world, for the value of this heavenly gift far exceeds that of any fortune on earth. -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under for which the product is ARC'ed. Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC case proposing it. Your compare does not exist in the context of the product Solaris. It is therefor *completely* irrelevant to a PSARC discussion. Collaboration happens in the community. Collaboration also needs to happen in reasonable context. It seems your argument is that your compare exist before hand, therefore it can not be used. This is more like a trademark game. The OpenSolaris community can not afford to search every single binary existed out there before it is decided what it is called. It is simply too costly for ARC and engineers. If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try to collaborate. This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination! This is NOT a case of collaboration or domination. Imagemagik was not developed within Sun, it is from the Imagamagik community, you can blame the Imagemagik community being dominant. You can only blame Sun's engineers being dominant when you submit your ARC case for your product into OpenSolaris integration and negotiate with to the module owner of imagemagik to move its installed location when he refuses to consider your plea. Until such thing happens, you are trying to be dominant. -Ghee ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Collaboration happens in the community. If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try to collaborate. This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination! No. You seem to operate under the misapprehension that collaboration implies that you get your way. Clearly there is a (perceived) conflict between your compare command and ImageMagick's compare command. There are several ways to resolve this conflict: rename or remove IM' compare breaks full compatibility with IM move IM someplace else this makes it more difficult to discover and use (and therefor makes Solaris more difficult to use) and this may still break compatility if your compare is installed keep IM compare with IM in /usr/bin Of these three alternatives, I would say that the 3rd one is the best for the majority of OpenSolaris/Solaris users as I have seen not even a shred of evidence to the contrary. And as I said, in the context of Solaris/OpenSolaris no such thing as the other compare exists so the whole point is moot anyway. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name is thus illegal. Says who? And who keeps the record or registry? Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick? This is really beside the point within the context of a distro. How does other Linux distro handle this? Because if Sun does not rename the image magick program Sun verifies that PSARC discussions are just to fool people but do not have useful resaults. Remember Joerg, being listened to is NOT the same as getting your way. It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on OpenSolaris and not just ignorant domination from Sun. Let not argue your case by calling us ignorant! The point is imagemagik is integrated. It is not against any ARC rule in name space assignment. If indeed you have submitted an ARC earlier with the intention to integrate, ARC will definitely advise against the imagemagik case to rename or some sort. Do we have an OpenSolaris community or is this just a fake? What response might you get if you make the same proposal to other Linux community like ubuntu or fedora? Suggesting to them I have this 20 years old binary, however, it does not run in your distro, but I like to reserve the name. Do you think this is reasonable? -Ghee The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. Jörg ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under for which the product is ARC'ed. Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC case proposing it. Your compare does not exist in the context of the product Solaris. It is therefor *completely* irrelevant to a PSARC discussion. Collaboration happens in the community. If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try to collaborate. This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination! But Solaris != OpenSolaris. Right? Or am I missing something. Just because something is one way in Solaris doesn't mean it has to be that way in (any particular distribution of) OpenSolaris. Solaris is one distribution. It's Sun's Distribution. I don't think it's correct to call them applying their rules (rules which it sounds like have been used since Solaris was started) to how they manage it. The community will have it's say in the other distributions that are created from OpenSolaris. If one or more of those distributions wants to do what you're suggesting, then it can. And (while I haven't read the gonverning documents, I'm pretty sure) Sun can't do anything to stop that. I'm not surprised there are disagreements like this appearing in this community. It has to be expected that this many people are not going to agree on everything. I think that's why it was smart to plan for multiple distributions. It leaves rooms for groups of like minded people to do things differently. I think we have to expect more things like this in the future. And if Sun does what it thinks needs to be done in Solaris, I don't see it as being heavy handed.They're just one sub-community (with their own way of working out these disagreements internally to their group) within the larger community. -Kyle -Kyle Jörg ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion: If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used in /usr/bin. Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions. PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under for which the product is ARC'ed. Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC case proposing it. Your compare does not exist in the context of the product Solaris. It is therefor *completely* irrelevant to a PSARC discussion. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's very simple, Joerg, first to integrate wins. WRONG: in the OSS world the first user os a name wins and the imagemagick name is thus illegal. Says who? And who keeps the record or registry? Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick? Because if Sun does not rename the image magick program Sun verifies that PSARC discussions are just to fool people but do not have useful resaults. Remember Joerg, being listened to is NOT the same as getting your way. It is just another chance to verify that there is collaboration on OpenSolaris and not just ignorant domination from Sun. Do we have an OpenSolaris community or is this just a fake? The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PSARC discussions happen ONLY in the context of the product/release under for which the product is ARC'ed. Your compare is NOT part of that product; nor is there even an ARC case proposing it. Your compare does not exist in the context of the product Solaris. It is therefor *completely* irrelevant to a PSARC discussion. Collaboration happens in the community. If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try to collaborate. This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination! Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote: The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing netcat (PSARC 2007/389) could have possibly given you the idea that compare would be a name reserved for your program. Joep ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Collaboration happens in the community. If you are a member of the OpenSolaris community, you should try to collaborate. This is a case to see whether there is collaboration or domination! No. You seem to operate under the misapprehension that collaboration implies that you get your way. You operate under the missconception that OSS is a world of domination. I know friendly and cooperative OSS and people who check the current namespace when introducing new program names. Clearly there is a (perceived) conflict between your compare command and ImageMagick's compare command. There are several ways to resolve this conflict: rename or remove IM' compare breaks full compatibility with IM move IM someplace else this makes it more difficult to discover and use (and therefor makes Solaris more difficult to use) and this may still break compatility if your compare is installed keep IM compare with IM in /usr/bin Of these three alternatives, I would say that the 3rd one is the best for the majority of OpenSolaris/Solaris users as I have seen not even a shred of evidence to the contrary. The last choice is the worst. It ignores the fact that a polluted /usr/bin/ cannot be early in PATH, that compare from Imagemagick does no generic comparison that would justfy the name compare and that my compare is 20 years older. Remember the problem with Fdisk IS 0x82. This has the same background. Sun no longer uses this ID because the Linux people did make the ID 0x82 known in the public before Sun did. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you like to ignore that my compare is genric and thus correctly using the name and that it is 20 years older than imagemagick? compare as a word dates back to probably 1000BC when the latin language developed. Its use in english is post-norman, though, being imported from french, but even that makes the english word almost thousand years old. This does not apply to our computer enviromnent. What, except a) that I was tortured with Latin in school, and b) that I can sound quite patronizing if I chose to, does that prove ? Generic words can't be trademarked. That's why everyone can call their stuff Windows, Microsoft lost a corresponding lawsuit a few years ago. You chose a simple english word, you can't claim exclusive rights to it. This is not a trademark problem but a name clash problem. We did have a long discussion in the arc mailing list and agreed not to put names into /usr/bin that would cause name clashes. For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed or it needs to be put into a different directory. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Collaboration also needs to happen in reasonable context. It seems your argument is that your compare exist before hand, therefore it can not be used. This is more like a trademark game. The OpenSolaris community can not afford to search every single binary existed out there before it is decided what it is called. It is simply too costly for ARC and engineers. For this reason, I did warn in time _before_ the clash happened. If people ignore me, it is not my fault. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote: The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing netcat (PSARC 2007/389) could have possibly given you the idea that compare would be a name reserved for your program. The fact that you found this text verifies that you got the message... Not people only need to behave the same way. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote: The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing netcat (PSARC 2007/389) could have possibly given you the idea that compare would be a name reserved for your program. The fact that you found this text verifies that you got the message... Obscurity doesn't help your argument. I'm sure many of us had no clue what you were referring to (I didn't). Not people only need to behave the same way. Why are we still arguing about this stuff? You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising: run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris, get them approved, implement any TCRs, consider implementing TCAs, and *integrate* into the proper consolidation. Yes, there are conflicts. Yes, in order to integrate star and other utilities you'll have to make compromises that you may dislike. C'est la vie. Complaining ad naseum about how we don't do what you want us to do (which you could be doing instead) won't produce the results that you want. It hasn't yet, that's certain. Please respect the reply-to header, and please don't respond to me directly. Thanks, Nico -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed or it needs to be put into a different directory. Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command; why don't you rename yours? Since there is already a plain file compare program cmp which is getopt compliant, why don't you add the additional features there? Your distribution is free to choose a different naming for the commands; but Solaris has picked a different track because from Solaris' point of view THERE IS NO CONFLICT BECAUSE THERE IS NO OTHER compare PROGRAM. 'nuf said. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already cancel,accept etc. It is very important for adoption of OpenSolaris distributions that in some cases when OpenSolaris imports external technology that we do so in the most appropriate way, in the ImageMagick case that means not changing the default program names. So how did these names make it into /usr/bin/? The third sentence in that quoted paragraph is the reason. Note that I said I personally not The ARC requires. It usually helps to avoid problems if things are planned instead of just let them pile up. I personally don't see an problem with this particular instance. I also see no generic issue here just your personal crusade, against any program name you happen to have picked. In this particular instance your choice of a generic english word for a specific comparison technology is just as much at fault as ImageMagick. That fact that you believe yours predates theirs really doesn't matter. What does mater for OpenSolaris is that the ImageMagick case followed the appropriate process and has integrated. BTW: I am still waiting for a reply that signalls the will for cooperation. Cooperation would mean that both upstream projects yours and ImageMagick agreed to a change. OpenSolaris is just the messenger here. If you want cooperation you need to be willing to compromise otherwise there is no cooperation only Joerg dictate. -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever) name is a conflict with another existing one. I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making such a proposal specific to his troubles with star, compare, etc... I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with Linux distros (and *BSDs) that are also growing and evolving at different rates. But it may be worthwhile to try. Nico -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already cancel,accept etc. It is very important for adoption of OpenSolaris distributions that in some cases when OpenSolaris imports external technology that we do so in the most appropriate way, in the ImageMagick case that means not changing the default program names. So how did these names make it into /usr/bin/? It usually helps to avoid problems if things are planned instead of just let them pile up. BTW: I am still waiting for a reply that signalls the will for cooperation. Replies like: we made it, you lost do not help. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Dec 14, 2007 7:44 PM, Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with Linux distros (and *BSDs) that are also growing and evolving at different rates. But it may be worthwhile to try. What are you all discussing anyway? /usr/bin/compare is in use, big ffing deal. Call it scompare (s from shilling obviously) like we see with star and what not. Get over yourselfs, really. I am sure you all have more important things to do. Sorry for my bluntness but this is both silly and frustrating looking at the work that still has/should be done. Patrick ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed or it needs to be put into a different directory. Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command; why don't you rename yours? Looks like you are unwilling to cooperate! Why should I rename that exists in the public for a long time just because some uncooperative people reused the name? In order to compromise and to move forward. Otherwise you just look demanding, unwilling to make any change and difficult to work with so people will eventually just start ignoring you. If that is the stance you want to take that is your choice but don't expect others to change if you aren't willing to. Oldest provable use isn't what matters, sometimes most popular elsewhere is what is most important and sometimes it isn't. Sometimes it is just first past the post is what wins and in this case ImageMagick one. When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already cancel,accept etc. It is very important for adoption of OpenSolaris distributions that in some cases when OpenSolaris imports external technology that we do so in the most appropriate way, in the ImageMagick case that means not changing the default program names. -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss, not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please. On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are we still arguing about this stuff? You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising: run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris, As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not do this! ARC cases help, but are not sufficient. You *must* integrate in order to turn an ARC case into reality. A project that never integrates can have its approved ARC cases withdrawn, ignored, ... The ARC is not the enforcer: the c-team is. And executable name conflicts are *very* obvious to the c-team (both, from putback notifications and from the nightlies run by the gatekeepers), whereas not so obvious to the ARC. You are responsible to allow approved arc cases to be integrated before arc cases can be taken for serious. As for today arc cases are a big tool to spend time on but they do not result in facts. Approved ARC cases are not an obligation to expend resources to get the given projects integrated. In your case *you* could do the work, but you seem to expect Sun to pay others to do it. Evidently noone at Sun is interested in doing what you ought to do yourself. Nico -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: Norm Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the ImageMagick open source project that chose the name compare for their program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest of the ImageMagick commands, but there was a reasonable expectation that we would do so when we integrated it into Solaris. Remarkably, this is how it's been done on other open source operating system distributions. The fact that /usr/bin/compare on other open source operating system distributions comes from ImageMagick must be lost on you. You may not like it, I may or may not like it, but that's simply how it is. Are you working on preventing OpenSolaris from being a working alternative? Just the opposite. In this case, by providing most users what they expect to find, we are making Open Solaris a more viable alternative for them. Why do you care whether others make it wrong too? In this case, wrong is a subjective term. What you believe to be wrong, other (not just Sun) have decided is right. -Norm ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote: The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name appeared in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in Solaris Express. I completely fail to see how your side comment on a PSARC case discussing netcat (PSARC 2007/389) could have possibly given you the idea that compare would be a name reserved for your program. The fact that you found this text verifies that you got the message... Obscurity doesn't help your argument. I'm sure many of us had no clue what you were referring to (I didn't). Not people only need to behave the same way. Why are we still arguing about this stuff? You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising: run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris, As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not do this! You are responsible to allow approved arc cases to be integrated before arc cases can be taken for serious. As for today arc cases are a big tool to spend time on but they do not result in facts. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed or it needs to be put into a different directory. Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command; why don't you rename yours? Looks like you are unwilling to cooperate! Why should I rename that exists in the public for a long time just because some uncooperative people reused the name? Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss, not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please. On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are we still arguing about this stuff? You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising: run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris, As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not do this! ARC cases help, but are not sufficient. You *must* integrate in order to turn an ARC case into reality. A project that never integrates can have its approved ARC cases withdrawn, ignored, ... I would like to integrate but it seems to be impossible. As long as this does not work, the OpenSolaris ecosystem does not yet exist. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When it comes to generic names (which unfortunately ImageMagick is full of) I personally would prefer that it wasn't allowed unless they were really generic. However UNIX is full of stuff like this already cancel,accept etc. It is very important for adoption of OpenSolaris distributions that in some cases when OpenSolaris imports external technology that we do so in the most appropriate way, in the ImageMagick case that means not changing the default program names. So how did these names make it into /usr/bin/? The third sentence in that quoted paragraph is the reason. Note that I said I personally not The ARC requires. It usually helps to avoid problems if things are planned instead of just let them pile up. I personally don't see an problem with this particular instance. I also I currently only see your unwillingness. Your problem is not that you did not know the problem before I mentioned it, your problem is that you ignore input from other people. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Norm Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the ImageMagick open source project that chose the name compare for their program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest of the ImageMagick commands, but there was a reasonable expectation that we would do so when we integrated it into Solaris. Remarkably, this is how it's been done on other open source operating system distributions. The fact that /usr/bin/compare on other open source operating system distributions comes from ImageMagick must be lost on you. You may not like it, I may or may not like it, but that's simply how it is. Are you working on preventing OpenSolaris from being a working alternative? Why do you care whether others make it wrong too? Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Actually, we have a cooperative process for dealing with this kind of thing. It's call ARCing. Joerg Schilling wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For this reason, the compare from imagemagick either needs to be renamed or it needs to be put into a different directory. Your compare command gives a name clash with ImageMagick's compare command; why don't you rename yours? Looks like you are unwilling to cooperate! Why should I rename that exists in the public for a long time just because some uncooperative people reused the name? Your argument there is with the open source community. It's the ImageMagick open source project that chose the name compare for their program. Yes, we did choose to place it in /usr/bin along with the rest of the ImageMagick commands, but there was a reasonable expectation that we would do so when we integrated it into Solaris. Remarkably, this is how it's been done on other open source operating system distributions. The fact that /usr/bin/compare on other open source operating system distributions comes from ImageMagick must be lost on you. You may not like it, I may or may not like it, but that's simply how it is. -Norm ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever) name is a conflict with another existing one. I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making such a proposal specific to his troubles with star, compare, etc... I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. You have to verify that the way it is currently handled actually works. My impression is that it is either impossible to integrate stuff at all or that some people inside Sun boycott the integration of star. If you would ask me now, I could only say it does not work. Think about how to find a way to change this Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. ARC does not decide as much as approves, approves w/ TCRs or denies. But projects approved by the ARC are often implemented so to claim that that is impossible is ludicrous. But they are implemented by their stakeholders. And sometimes stakeholders leave and projects wither away. You have to verify that the way it is currently handled actually works. My impression is that it is either impossible to integrate stuff at all or that some people inside Sun boycott the integration of star. If you would ask me now, I could only say it does not work. We have not seen a request-sponsor request from you for the integration of star nor have we seen any other attempt to do so. YOU will have to do the work to integrate star. *ALL* the work; you will need to get to a point that you can type putback or whatever the equivalent is for the consolidation you want to put it in then solicit input for code reviews etc. Possibly revisit the ARC case and see whether it needs updating (this is likely a minor matter, but when ARC cases are so old, they likely need a few touchups). Since I have seen none of those things coming from you, I'd say that the star integration ball is firmly in your court and you need to pick it up and run with it. You have mentioned star integration many times and we tell you the exact same thing every time. So let me ask you a question: What is it that you expect Sun to do first? Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. It is clearly possible to implement ARC decisions in OpenSolaris - there are hundreds if not thousands of examples of this happening already. There are difficulties in external-to-Sun contributors getting their changes in - the huge backlog in request-sponsor for instance, the lack of an external gate that external contributors can commit to - but those do not make it impossible, as has been proven by contributors like Roland Mainz, Shawn Walker, Juergen Keil, Rich Lowe, and a whole lot more whose names I haven't memorized. However, there is no request from you in the request-sponsor list at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/request_sponsor/ so I can't see why you're complaining, since you obviously aren't even trying to get changes integrated. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg: You've been told how to prevent new conflicts with your tools arising: run one or more ARC cases for integrating your tools into OpenSolaris, As long as it has not been verified that arc cases help, I will definitely not do this! You are responsible to allow approved arc cases to be integrated before arc cases can be taken for serious. As for today arc cases are a big tool to spend time on but they do not result in facts. An interesting bit of history. For a long time the Sun JDS GNOME project team felt similar to you, that ARC is a waste of time, doesn't produce results, etc. A part of this bad attitude stemmed from the reasonable fact that the GNOME stack is huge with many complicated interfaces, making it painful to document as ARC requires. However, the JDS GNOME team bit the bullet, and I think the GNOME ARC cases are a nice example of how a free software project and ARC were able to work together. In these reviews, numerous issues were identified and resolved that otherwise would have been overlooked. I can honestly say that having an experienced group of architects look over our proposals greatly improved the quality of the GNOME desktop (both in general and how it is shipped on Solaris/OpenSolaris). My experience has been that ARC is very agreeable to work with people to figure out new ways of doing things when needed. It took us several failed attempts, but working together we found a way to document interface change in the GNOME desktop that is suitable to ARC and which also isn't so burdensome to the resources of the JDS team. I understand that figuring out how to make ARC work with external projects is a new thing, and will likely be a bit complicated at first. Since I was involved with the pain of ARC'ing GNOME, I can sympathize with anyone's tendency to try and avoid such pain. However, it shouldn't be a mystery to anyone that ARC is the review body that determines which interfaces are considered blessed. If you haven't even bothered to propose your interfaces to ARC (or process changes if you think the ARC process needs improvement), then you can't really claim to have tried very hard to work with the process. Brian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever) name is a conflict with another existing one. I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making such a proposal specific to his troubles with star, compare, etc... I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. You have to verify that the way it is currently handled actually works. My impression is that it is either impossible to integrate stuff at all or that some people inside Sun boycott the integration of star. If you would ask me now, I could only say it does not work. Think about how to find a way to change this Jorg, you are in SWAN now. You can put together a workspace, integrate star into it, send out the code reviews and ultimately submit the RTI. Until you have an RTI that is refused, or an ARC case that is rejected, I don't think it is fair to assume *anyone* is rejecting anything if you've done. But its also not fair to expect them to do this work for you. If someone else at Sun wants star badly then *they* could do the work. So, if your ARC cases have been approved, put together a workspace, and send out code reviews as the first step. Its really not that hard. I'd offer to help you with it myself, except I know nothing about the SFW consolidation, and have little interest learning it just to help you out. If however you want to integrate into ON, I can offer you some basic suggestions... but I'm still not going to do the work for you myself! I don't think anyone else will, either. As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your e-mails. -- Garrett ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:10:25PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever) name is a conflict with another existing one. I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making such a proposal specific to his troubles with star, compare, etc... I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. You have to verify that the way it is currently handled actually works. My impression is that it is either impossible to integrate stuff at all or that some people inside Sun boycott the integration of star. If you would ask me now, I could only say it does not work. Think about how to find a way to change this Jorg, you are in SWAN now. You can put together a workspace, integrate star into it, send out the code reviews and ultimately submit the RTI. Until you have an RTI that is refused, or an ARC case that is rejected, I don't think it is fair to assume *anyone* is rejecting anything if you've done. But its also not fair to expect them to do this work for you. If someone else at Sun wants star badly then *they* could do the work. So, if your ARC cases have been approved, put together a workspace, and send out code reviews as the first step. Its really not that hard. I'd offer to help you with it myself, except I know nothing about the SFW consolidation, and have little interest learning it just to help you out. If however you want to integrate into ON, I can offer you some basic suggestions... but I'm still not going to do the work for you myself! I don't think anyone else will, either. it depends, would the integration of star mark an end this ground-hog-day[1] like conversation? ed 1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundhog_Day_(film) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 08:35:33PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. You've jumped the shark. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
My experience has been that ARC is very agreeable to work with people to figure out new ways of doing things when needed. It took us several failed attempts, but working together we found a way to document interface change in the GNOME desktop that is suitable to ARC and which also isn't so burdensome to the resources of the JDS team. Thanks Brian for this perspective on the ARCs. I think that anyone who brings a project to the ARCs for the first time is taken aback by the volume of comments and what appears to be resistance. Each engineer's first major ARC experience, however, is a great learning experience. The first time you think it's a hurdle or unnecessary red-tape; but in the end you know better. You then start to realize that as an engineer you develop blinders early on in your design cycle; you then dig yourself into various holes. Then you get to the ARC with what you think is a complete project and people start asking question which appear hostile at first. But in the end you realize that there is no hostility, just business and genuine interest in keeping the product as good, reliable and maintainable as it is. They help you realize the holes you've dug and the mistakes you've made; or they make you rethink the things you didn't feel comfortable about either. And that is goodness. I think ksh93, for all the fireworks its ARC case seemed to bring, is a prime example of how this works; but it's like sausages. The end result can be very appealing but the process of making them is not for the fainthearted. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your e-mails. +1 for your Dad's community project!G -- Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your e-mails. +1 for your Dad's community project!G I am sorry that even you missunderstand things. Everything is ready for a long time and waiting for integration. The SFW makefile system is undocumented and idiosyncratic and it does not seem to support all I need. If the makefilesystem is usable, somebody just kows how just needs to write the wrapper Makefile. Time cannot be a problem as long as people spend a lot of time to explain that they are not responsible for the problem. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
Joerg Schilling wrote: You forget the most important result from the ARC discussion: If there is a name collision the cannot be resolved, the name cannot be used in /usr/bin. Current Solaris express is in conflict with ARC decisions. Jörg Seriously: Could you cite the precedent for this assertion? Aside: I'm more than amused that historically the use of fully qualified paths and lengthy PATH settings was the norm for Unix and Solaris. Then came Linux, which seems to want to place everything into a single directory, because they liked it. It seems that many people prefer this in the interest if EOU. The cost of better EOU is often less available choices. Solaris has been slowly evolving to this model. Tell me again how the OSS world is the poster boy for resolving conflicts... LOL, - jek3 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nameclash on svn_77 because Sun is ignoring PSARC discussions
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever) name is a conflict with another existing one. I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making such a proposal specific to his troubles with star, compare, etc... I'm not sure that we can come up with such a method that will: a) allow OpenSolaris to evolve and grow, while b) preventing any conflicts with As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris, OpenSolaris cannot evolve. You have to verify that the way it is currently handled actually works. My impression is that it is either impossible to integrate stuff at all or that some people inside Sun boycott the integration of star. If you would ask me now, I could only say it does not work. Think about how to find a way to change this Jorg, you are in SWAN now. You can put together a workspace, integrate star into it, send out the code reviews and ultimately submit the RTI. Until you have an RTI that is refused, or an ARC case that is rejected, I don't think it is fair to assume *anyone* is rejecting anything if you've done. But its also not fair to expect them to do this work for you. If someone else at Sun wants star badly then *they* could do the work. So, if your ARC cases have been approved, put together a workspace, and send out code reviews as the first step. Its really not that hard. I'd offer to help you with it myself, except I know nothing about the SFW consolidation, and have little interest learning it just to help you out. If however you want to integrate into ON, I can offer you some basic suggestions... but I'm still not going to do the work for you myself! I don't think anyone else will, either. As my dad always said, Actions speak louder than words. Demonstrate your commitment to getting star integrated by your deed rather than your e-mails. +1 Garrett's Dad is obviously a very smart man. And Garrett seems to have learned from his Dad very well. He (Garrett) is a very successful contributor to ON and a (successful) role model that we would do well to emulate. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ Graduate from sugar-coating school? Sorry - I never attended! :)___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
