Hi,
I'm sorry to revive this discussion, but what is the plan for x11/ion
now? Renaming it? If yes, then what name? Or removing it?
Would be nice to get a clear decission, as it's my favorite WM ATM.
--
simon
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 03:31:16PM +0200, Simon Kuhnle wrote:
So the current ports version will be the last?
Unless someone decides to please the author or he changes the license,
yes.
-p.
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 02:47:04PM +0200, Pedro Martelletto wrote:
In my case, I definitely lack the time and will to fulfill such stupid
requirements. Besides, while certainly unadvisable in a ports mailing
list, I'm pretty sure every Ion user out there is smart enough to fetch
and compile
On Tue 2007.05.01 at 23:12 +0200, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:14:00PM -0400, Okan Demirmen wrote:
On Mon 2007.04.30 at 17:39 +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:07:37AM +1000, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Urgh. Tuomo is weird sometimes. More reasons
On Mon 2007.04.30 at 17:39 +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:07:37AM +1000, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Urgh. Tuomo is weird sometimes. More reasons to move to
wmii / dwmhttp://www.suckless.org/wiki/dwm (MIT/X)
For dwm, see attachment.
switched from ion
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:14:00PM -0400, Okan Demirmen wrote:
On Mon 2007.04.30 at 17:39 +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:07:37AM +1000, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Urgh. Tuomo is weird sometimes. More reasons to move to
wmii / dwm
As can be seen in http://tinyurl.com/2pelmo [1], the author of x11/ion
recently changed the software's license to something obscure, completely
open to misinterpretation, and in my opinion incompatible with our ports
tree.
Therefore, I'd like to propose the complete removal of the port.
-p.
[1]
pedro:
As can be seen in http://tinyurl.com/2pelmo [1], the author of x11/ion
recently changed the software's license to something obscure, completely
open to misinterpretation, and in my opinion incompatible with our ports
tree.
Therefore, I'd like to propose the complete removal of the
On Monday 30 April 2007 15:58:02 Pedro Martelletto wrote:
As can be seen in http://tinyurl.com/2pelmo [1], the author of x11/ion
recently changed the software's license to something obscure, completely
open to misinterpretation, and in my opinion incompatible with our ports
tree.
Well, the
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:17:15PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Well, the licence is still LGPL, right?
Only the use of the name Ion* is restricted in a very weird way.
Can't you get in touch with the author to see if this can be fixed in some
way, something ala firefox?
What we could do
On Monday 30 April 2007 16:55:21 Pedro Martelletto wrote:
What we could do is to distribute the software under a different name,
like 'anion'. This way we would not be affected by the restrictions.
Yeah, I though about it at first, but I found it weird.
I mean, most people will think there's no
* Pedro Martelletto [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-04-30 15:58:02]:
As can be seen in http://tinyurl.com/2pelmo [1], the author of x11/ion
recently changed the software's license to something obscure, completely
open to misinterpretation, and in my opinion incompatible with our ports
tree.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:20:37AM -0500, Travers Buda wrote:
Point is, the unencumbered port works, no point in removing it over spite.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.window-managers.ion.general/7694
The author believes the license change to be retroactive (even though
that's clearly not
Anion sounds great to me. Please don't kill the port over a name.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:55:21PM +0200, Pedro Martelletto wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:17:15PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Well, the licence is still LGPL, right?
Only the use of the name Ion* is restricted in a
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:07:37AM +1000, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Urgh. Tuomo is weird sometimes. More reasons to move to
wmii / dwmhttp://www.suckless.org/wiki/dwm (MIT/X)
For dwm, see attachment.
xmonad http://xmonad.org/ (BSD3)
If this needs a recent ghc, it still has
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:20:37AM -0500, Travers Buda wrote:
Point is, the unencumbered port works, no point in removing it over spite.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.window-managers.ion.general/7694
The author believes the license change to be retroactive (even though
that's
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 09:45:37AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I think a better fight against such balony is to keep his code in the
ports tree under the existing (previous) license, and let it rot at
that level, if need be.
Once you release something under a copyright, there is no
Sure we can keep ion3 ad is but I'd like to pick up the new changes in a
forked project called bananawm :-)
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:52:04PM +0200, Pedro Martelletto wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 09:45:37AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I think a better fight against such balony is to keep
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:25:21PM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
The ports tree is here for our users convenience. If a port has a
strange license, you can always set the PERMIT_xy fields. Many users
use ion, so why should we harrass them?
It was not a simple question of removing the port
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Marc Balmer wrote:
Then we should just remove the damn software.
No.
lol, I love the way you argue...
--
Antoine
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:25:21PM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
The ports tree is here for our users convenience. If a port has a
strange license, you can always set the PERMIT_xy fields. Many users
use ion, so why should we harrass them?
It was not a simple question of removing the port
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:44:50AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Actually, it is not a matter of conformance against what the author
believes. Authors believe the most retarded things from time to time.
Sure, but it _was_ due to a possible conformance problem that I
suggested the removal of the
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:24:07AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
Sure we can keep ion3 ad is but I'd like to pick up the new changes in a
forked project called bananawm :-)
bananawm? I don't get it. How about FreeIon for a fork:
FreeIon: if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the
* Pedro Martelletto wrote:
As can be seen in http://tinyurl.com/2pelmo [1], the author of x11/ion
recently changed the software's license to something obscure, completely
open to misinterpretation, and in my opinion incompatible with our ports
tree.
Therefore, I'd like to propose the
* Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
On Monday 30 April 2007 16:55:21 Pedro Martelletto wrote:
What we could do is to distribute the software under a different name,
like 'anion'. This way we would not be affected by the restrictions.
Yeah, I though about it at first, but I found it weird.
I mean,
25 matches
Mail list logo
