Multiple responses following, so that I'm not accused of spamming the list.
On Monday 29 March 2010 19:02:23 Iruata Souza wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Corey co...@bitworthy.net wrote:
snip
No one's willing to spearhead a General Purpose 9 experiment, and no
one's interested in
No one's willing to spearhead a General Purpose 9 experiment, and no
one's interested in collaborating on and contributing to such a project?
If you want [general purpose], you know where to get it. seems to
be the period that ends all such discussion.
I wouldn't quite agree, the
I agree with Steve.
I like the community approach to this matter: if plan9 doesn't have
what you need, do it yourself; if you do something that might be
useful for others share it and see what happens.
Being a newbie myself I find very hard to write my own utilities, but
that's a good way to learn
hello
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will only have one-man projects. . .
slds.
gabi
El 30/03/2010, a las 12:19, hugo rivera escribió:
I agree with Steve.
I like the community approach to this matter: if plan9 doesn't have
what you need, do it yourself; if you do something that might
I don't agree. I think that more than one person can be involved in
any given project.
2010/3/30 Gabriel Diaz Lopez de la Llave gd...@rejaa.com:
hello
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will only have one-man projects. . .
slds.
gabi
--
Hugo
On Mar 30, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Gabriel Diaz Lopez de la Llave wrote:
hello
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will only have one-man
projects. . .
Do it yourself refers to the community doing anything they need. Most
things are so trivial that one or two people can do it. That doesn't
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 01:34:12PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
This way (dot-it-your-self-way) we will only have one-man projects. . .
True, if anyone feels that a project is too big for them then
by all means put a shout out on the list and see if anyone there wants to
help.
Everything
On one side, you have code (result) and consistency; on the
other side, you have _inhumanity_ since you have increasing of the
entropy that is disorder: order is unnatural, and is the mark of human
activity. Open source seems very natural in this sense: the
bazaar...
Until you factor in one
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Albert Skye mistl...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
order is unnatural
The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution
by Stuart A. Kauffman
http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Order-Self-Organization-Selection-Evolution/dp/0195079515
Why have facts
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:07:11AM -0700, Albert Skye wrote:
order is unnatural
The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution
by Stuart A. Kauffman
http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Order-Self-Organization-Selection-Evolution/dp/0195079515
order is unnatural for things
I am utterly depressed that this pedestrian crap can so easily get a
rise out of several 9fans after all these times.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly kameo76...@gmail.com wrote:
Read up on why Plan 9 was written. We've been succeeding for 20 years so
far.
I think this is an interesting comment in light of the evolution
thread. Most people (incorrectly) equate evolution with progress.
Whether or
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Jack Johnson knapj...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly kameo76...@gmail.com wrote:
around with relatively few upgrades for the past 420 billion years or
s/billion/million/
-Jack
On Mar 30, 2010, at 14:23, Jack Johnson knapj...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Patrick Kelly
kameo76...@gmail.com wrote:
Read up on why Plan 9 was written. We've been succeeding for 20
years so
far.
I think this is an interesting comment in light of the evolution
On Monday 29 March 2010 14:09:32 erik quanstrom wrote:
Day to day computer work will not generally be done on a Plan9 terminal
until Glenda finally overcomes her profoundly crippling case of
automysophobia.
snip
unless you're going to do something about this, you're just
trolling.
On Monday 29 March 2010 17:24:08 erik quanstrom wrote:
In any given social environment, communicating dissatisfaction of
the status quo is often the logical first step towards choices (a)
and/or (b) - due to the fact that going off on one's own to work
alone in a vacuum on a major
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Corey co...@bitworthy.net wrote:
On Monday 29 March 2010 17:24:08 erik quanstrom wrote:
In any given social environment, communicating dissatisfaction of
the status quo is often the logical first step towards choices (a)
and/or (b) - due to the fact that
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 06:21:54PM -0700, Corey wrote:
Are the core Plan 9 design concepts in fact ineffective or unsuitable for
building a general purpose computing environment?
I find that very hard to believe - but there's over 15 years of evidence
which seems to imply just that.
There's
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Corey co...@bitworthy.net wrote:
Is it that the core Plan 9 design concepts[1] are in fact inappropriate or
uninteresting for anything beyond that which Plan 9 currently provides?
[1] /sys/doc
Where's the beef? is certainly a fair and reasonable thing to ask.
I got hungry and ate it.
What I'm wondering, however, is _what's_ the beef?
Beef comes from the cow.
As you said, these arguments have indeed been going on for some
time - so, why only talk and no action? It's weird.
Well, most of Plan 9's ideas have been trickling down into general
purpose operating systems for years! I don't see what others here
claiming failure of Plan 9 are referring to.
In order to bring new technology to mass consumption, you don't bring
the masses to drive the formula 1 race car... you
21 matches
Mail list logo
