From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 08:10:59 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F2816A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 08:10:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from 82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk (82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk [82.41.27.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7568343D39 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 08:10:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrew@cream.org) Received: from cream.org (spatula.flat [192.168.0.2]) by myriad.flat (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44460BA for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 15:02:53 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:11:09 +0000 From: Andrew Boothman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: chat@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:10:59 -0000 Hi everybody, I've just noticed an interesting fact. If you visit the mailing list archives on http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ you'll notice that in 2003 there were 20,000 less messages to FreeBSD.org mailing lists compared to 2002. That's a fall of about 8% (Although we did still manage to increase the total size of those emails - thanks to all those essay email writers! :-) That's the first time since FreeBSD began that there's been a fall in numbers. Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no question that there's more than enough development going on in all the BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... Discuss. :) Andrew From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 09:04:37 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1625916A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 09:04:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from papagena.rockefeller.edu (user-0cdfenm.cable.mindspring.com [24.215.186.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 54EB943D1D for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 09:04:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@online.fr) Received: (qmail 1566 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Jan 2004 17:04:39 -0000 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:04:39 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Richard Schilling Message-ID: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040125130811.GE309@foghorn.rsmba.biz> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.23 i686 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:04:37 -0000 [probably OT even for -chat, but...] Richard Schilling wrote: > The [L]GPL license makes this the submission of changes mandatory, No, it does not. Please do your homework before posting such rubbish in public. What is mandatory is distributing source code if you redistribute your binary. Since you are not planning to allow redistribution, this is a non-issue. The GPL and LGPL emphatically do not require submission of changes, private or public, back to the original author. Private changes can remain in your hands, and you're required to give source code only to parties to whom you distribute a binary. > The problem with [L]GPL and BSD is that if someone does not turn in > their changes then the developer has no recourse to enforce the > requirment. That is because there is no such requirement. When there is a genuine GPL violation, there are legal recourses. Sending the original author your private modification is not a requirement of any licence I know of (and is probably not enforceable even if you required it). And your licence violates practically every other requirement of open source as commonly understood and as defined on www.opensource.org, starting with the very first (free redistribution). So please don't call it open source. [from another mail] > > See http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php. > > I read that very carefully. Please read it again, starting from the top. > I am trying to make it possible for people to earn a living as Open > Source developers. No, you're not. You're trying to hitch a free ride on the "open source" buzzword, without meeting its requirements. The world does not owe you a living. -- Rahul From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 10:31:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4417916A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:31:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.tacorp.net (mail.tacorp.net [208.20.58.199]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F8C943D3F for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:31:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from raistlin@tacorp.net) Received: from mail.tacorp.net (raistlin@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.tacorp.net (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0PIgkrm052842; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:42:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from raistlin@tacorp.net) Received: from localhost (raistlin@localhost)i0PIghjD052839; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:42:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from raistlin@tacorp.net) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.tacorp.net: raistlin owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:42:43 -0500 (EST) From: Jason Slagle To: Andrew Boothman In-Reply-To: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> Message-ID: <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:31:18 -0000 On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Andrew Boothman wrote: > Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no > question that there's more than enough development going on in all the > BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing > list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that > too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? > > I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or > perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... Perhaps the "New installing base" is shrinking as most of the people willing to do it have done it already, which means there are less novice questions asked? Jason -- Jason Slagle - CCNP - CCDP /"\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign . X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail . / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail . From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 10:55:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C934E16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:55:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from priv-edtnes46.telusplanet.net (defout.telus.net [199.185.220.240]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822B643D1F for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:55:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cpressey@catseye.mine.nu) Received: from catseye.biscuit.boo ([207.81.17.215]) by priv-edtnes46.telusplanet.netSMTP <20040125185505.GESQ27216.priv-edtnes46.telusplanet.net@catseye.biscuit.boo>; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:55:05 -0700 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:59:16 -0800 From: Chris Pressey To: Richard Schilling Message-Id: <20040125105916.271cddce.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> In-Reply-To: <20040125131238.GI309@foghorn.rsmba.biz> References: <20040125131238.GI309@foghorn.rsmba.biz> Organization: Cat's Eye Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8a (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:55:06 -0000 On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 05:12:38 -0800 Richard Schilling wrote: > On 2004.01.24 19:14 Bill Woods wrote: > > And this has what do do with FreeBSD Stable ? > > It's simply a notification that I will be distributing some of my > original works under this license. Since FreeBSD is the mainstay > operating system for me and my company, we forsee at some point to > start releasing new BSD add-ons under this license. There's certainly nothing stopping you from releasing proprietary add-ons for FreeBSD, and making the source for them public, and accepting patches from developers. i.e. There's no reason to become OSI certified to distribute software in the manner that you seem to intend. -Chris From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 10:58:02 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2A6816A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:58:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.2.69.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BB7E43D53 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:58:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (localhost [IPv6:::1]) i0PIvrjc013239 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:57:53 GMT (envelope-from matthew@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: (from matthew@localhost)id i0PIvrYR013238; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:57:53 GMT (envelope-from matthew) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:57:53 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman To: Jason Slagle Message-ID: <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:58:03 -0000 --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 01:42:43PM -0500, Jason Slagle wrote: > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Andrew Boothman wrote: >=20 > > Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no > > question that there's more than enough development going on in all the > > BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing > > list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that > > too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? > > > > I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or > > perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... >=20 > Perhaps the "New installing base" is shrinking as most of the people > willing to do it have done it already, which means there are less novice > questions asked? Yeah, things have slacked off a bit. I don't think there's anything sinister about that. I think it's mostly just natural variation -- these things go in waves: suddenly some particular subject is flavour of the moment, and you get a run of questions about it. For instance, there seems to have been quite a few questions recently about people having trouble installing 5.2, but fewer about other perennial favourites like sendmail config or how to cope with an ABI version bump in a shared library. Possibly some of those essay-length answers (and I'm as guilty as anyone at going on at great length...) have helped because people can solve their problems by Googling, and don't actually have to ask on the list. I think too there was quite a lot of interest from the MacOS X crowd as well, right around the time Panther was released. There was some confusion about just how much FreeBSD stuff there was in MacOS X and how much FreeBSD lore could be carried over. Then there's the Slashdot effect. I've noticed that there seem to be fewer *BSD stories recently, but that those stories are attracting a lot more discussion. Much of it is quite reasonable and not just the Linux frat-boys beating their chests and repeating the same old trolls. And there does often seem to be a bit of a surge on questions@... for a few days after a big FreeBSD story. Of course, this is all just my impression and probably wouldn't stand up for a minute to any sort of real hard look at the numbers. Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQFAFBGxdtESqEQa7a0RAshjAJisb+pY8gx4PAdF4zSAieDWV4b6AJ9A1EQn iLnzjxgiqxT8nfm7YkFmlQ== =Bxx8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 11:11:46 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3AC116A4CF for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:11:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F36C843D58 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:11:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-17-47-224.client.comcast.net[24.17.47.224]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004012519114001100j9croe>; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:11:40 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0PJB4YS060061; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:11:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0PJAxLO060060; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:10:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: Rahul Siddharthan References: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:10:59 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> (Rahul Siddharthan's message of "Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:04:39 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: Richard Schilling cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:11:47 -0000 Rahul Siddharthan writes: > Richard Schilling wrote: >> The [L]GPL license makes this the submission of changes mandatory, > > No, it does not. Please do your homework before posting such rubbish > in public. What is mandatory is distributing source code if you > redistribute your binary. Since you are not planning to allow > redistribution, this is a non-issue. The GPL and LGPL emphatically do > not require submission of changes, private or public, back to the > original author. Private changes can remain in your hands, and you're > required to give source code only to parties to whom you distribute a > binary. While it's probably low risk to assume that some private derivatives are not subject to the "all third parties" clause, it's none-the-less debatable, given the GPL's loose use of the word "distribute", which doesn't have a well-known meaning, at least to typical licensors and licensees who are the ones who are ostensibly using the language. The liberal interpretation of the GPL pretends that "distribute" and "publish" are interchangeable and that the GPL's "distribute or publish" is thus redundant. Copyright law uses the phrase "distribute to the public", which leads one to assume that there can be private distribution too. E.g., distribution between two friends or two companies or within a company or even between one person's two computers. It's not clear what the GPL means, even if the FSF has made clear what they believe it to mean. (The FSF isn't the only user of the GPL, of course.) Going further, I seriously think it's possible to read GPL clause 2 as an intertwined-rights license. That is, it could be read as saying that you may modify and distribute the derivative, but it doesn't say you may modify and not distribute the derivative. The subclauses 2a and 2c don't make much sense if you are not going to distribute the derivative, and in clause 2c would actually be non-sensical on two counts when it requires the startup message to say the the program may be *re*distributed by users under the GPL, when the private derivative has private non-GPL code and this is not under the GPL. > GPL violation, there are legal recourses. Sending the original > author your private modification is not a requirement of any licence I > know of (and is probably not enforceable even if you required it). IIRC, it was on AT&T's Korn shell, and I'm fairly sure a couple of others I've seen out of large companies. > And your licence violates practically every other requirement of open > source as commonly understood and as defined on www.opensource.org, > starting with the very first (free redistribution). So please don't > call it open source. Fooey. Open source is software which you can read without cost. Remember "The Open Software Foundation" and what licenses they had? Don't let a Linux-heavy committee draw the line arbitrarily on the wrong side of the GPL and redefine this term which has an obvious natural English descriptive meaning. (Thank the USPTO for disallowing the trademark claim, for the same reason.) Otherwise, I don't consider GPL code open source, because it's not open to public derivation without payment in the form of cross-licensing of the deriver's work. If you feel compelled to use the committee-approved definition, please capitalize it. > You're trying to hitch a free ride on the "open > source" buzzword, without meeting its requirements. The world does > not owe you a living. All true, but it's only a variant on what Perens and the opensource.org crowd are doing with the "open" buzzword. The world does not owe opensource.org the world's copyright licenses, unless they choose to accept their restrictive, proprietary licenses, with the GPL being only one of the worst which meet opensource.org's arbitrary definitions, created mainly so that "open" is more-or-less equivalent to "GPL-compatible" so that the restrictive GPL can hitch a free ride on the "open" buzzword. At least Richard has the merit of doing it for his living, and not for his pride, as is evidenced by the GPL's prohibitions against putting a GPL'd "getline" call in an otherwise BSDL'd program; that's about hubris, not freedom or openness. Have a nice day. Way to go, JPL! From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 11:38:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117BC16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:38:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from 82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk (82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk [82.41.27.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D7243D2F for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:38:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrew@cream.org) Received: from cream.org (spatula.flat [192.168.0.2]) by myriad.flat (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BF5FBA; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 18:30:20 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:38:37 +0000 From: Andrew Boothman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Seaman References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:38:31 -0000 Matthew Seaman wrote: >>>Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no >>>question that there's more than enough development going on in all the >>>BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing >>>list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that >>>too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? >>> >>>I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or >>>perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... >> >>Perhaps the "New installing base" is shrinking as most of the people >>willing to do it have done it already, which means there are less novice >>questions asked? > > > Yeah, things have slacked off a bit. I don't think there's anything > sinister about that. I think it's mostly just natural variation -- > these things go in waves: suddenly some particular subject is flavour > of the moment, and you get a run of questions about it. For instance, > there seems to have been quite a few questions recently about people > having trouble installing 5.2, but fewer about other perennial > favourites like sendmail config or how to cope with an ABI version > bump in a shared library. Agreed, but it would seem surprising to me that FreeBSD's installed base is growing and mailing list traffic isn't. We have no method for estimating the number of installed FreeBSD boxes, but I would have thought that mailing list traffic was quite a good indicator. Perhaps we're just so good and documenting now, that nobody needs to ask a question? ;) > Possibly some of those essay-length answers (and I'm as guilty as > anyone at going on at great length...) have helped because people can > solve their problems by Googling, and don't actually have to ask on > the list. I'm not complaining about long emails - sometimes they are excellent reading. I just found it amusing that there are less emails, but together they take up more space. > Then there's the Slashdot effect. I've noticed that there seem to be > fewer *BSD stories recently, but that those stories are attracting a > lot more discussion. Much of it is quite reasonable and not just the > Linux frat-boys beating their chests and repeating the same old > trolls. And there does often seem to be a bit of a surge on > questions@... for a few days after a big FreeBSD story. Perhaps all we're missing are indignant arguments on -chat or -hackers and all the programming and users are going on in the exactly the same as they always have. I know it's difficult (and probably inaccurate) to infer things about the project from one statistic alone. Download statistics over the years might be more enlightening... Andrew From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 11:47:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC2016A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:47:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-67-119-53-122.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D989C43D2D for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:47:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7FC6966DF2; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:47:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:47:21 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: Andrew Boothman Message-ID: <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J/dobhs11T7y2rNN" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:47:27 -0000 --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:38:37PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > Agreed, but it would seem surprising to me that FreeBSD's installed base= =20 > is growing and mailing list traffic isn't. We have no method for=20 > estimating the number of installed FreeBSD boxes, but I would have=20 > thought that mailing list traffic was quite a good indicator. Statistics are available and have been posted from time to time in the past. CD sales, FTP downloads, website traffic from FreeBSD clients, Netcraft webserver counts, etc. I don't recall any other indications of shrinking user base (on the contrary, my memory is that they support robust growth). > Perhaps we're just so good and documenting now, that nobody needs to ask= =20 > a question? ;) Don't underestimate that possibility. A hell of a lot of work has gone into improving the documentation, and a lot of mailing list traffic is in the category of newbie questions that are answered in the documentation. Kris --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAFB1JWry0BWjoQKURAr+GAJ4/aLtVsf3bHUa1nTIii7gN60T5BQCePtaU BRBh6q/xcexDorSyU+NWwAw= =NBtp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 11:50:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9D216A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:50:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from papagena.rockefeller.edu (user-0cdfenm.cable.mindspring.com [24.215.186.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A0B4643D31 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:50:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@online.fr) Received: (qmail 2516 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Jan 2004 19:50:23 -0000 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:50:23 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: underway@comcast.net Message-ID: <20040125195023.GA2469@online.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.23 i686 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:50:23 -0000 Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > Rahul Siddharthan writes: > > Richard Schilling wrote: > >> The [L]GPL license makes this the submission of changes mandatory, > > > > No, it does not. Please do your homework before posting such rubbish > > in public. What is mandatory is distributing source code if you > > redistribute your binary. Since you are not planning to allow > > redistribution, this is a non-issue. The GPL and LGPL emphatically do > > not require submission of changes, private or public, back to the > > original author. Private changes can remain in your hands, and you're > > required to give source code only to parties to whom you distribute a > > binary. > > While it's probably low risk to assume that some private derivatives > are not subject to the "all third parties" clause, it's none-the-less > debatable, given the GPL's loose use of the word "distribute", which > doesn't have a well-known meaning, at least to typical licensors and > licensees who are the ones who are ostensibly using the language. The > liberal interpretation of the GPL pretends that "distribute" and > "publish" are interchangeable and that the GPL's "distribute or > publish" is thus redundant. Copyright law uses the phrase "distribute > to the public", which leads one to assume that there can be private > distribution too. E.g., distribution between two friends or two > companies or within a company or even between one person's two > computers. It's not clear what the GPL means, even if the FSF has > made clear what they believe it to mean. (The FSF isn't the only > user of the GPL, of course.) If you distribute the binary to your friend, you should distribute the source to your friend. If you don't, it's a problem between your friend and you. But no third party can demand source to your program just because you distributed it to your friend. The GPL is very clearly written, it's just that people don't read it and for some reason go by totally bogus third-party interpretations. I strongly suggest you read it and think about it for yourself. > Going further, I seriously think it's possible to read GPL clause 2 > as an intertwined-rights license. That is, it could be read as saying > that you may modify and distribute the derivative, but it doesn't > say you may modify and not distribute the derivative. You don't require its permission for that. If you legally have a copy of it, you can do what you like to it, just as if you legally purchased a book, you may scribble on its margins. Try reading up, just a little, on copyright law. See also Dan Bernstein's take on this (without reference to the GPL): http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html Rahul From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 12:01:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14FB616A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:01:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from moutvdomng.kundenserver.de (moutvdom.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.249]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A32A43D1F for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:01:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from liamfoy@sepulcrum.org) Received: from [212.227.126.221] (helo=mrvdomng.kundenserver.de) by moutvdomng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1AkqS8-0002R7-00; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:01:52 +0100 Received: from [217.43.129.115] (helo=sepulcrum.org) by mrvdomng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1AkqS7-0006N6-00; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:01:51 +0100 Message-ID: <401420AE.9060702@sepulcrum.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:01:50 +0000 From: Liam Foy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20040117 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:01:56 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: >On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:38:37PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > > > >>Agreed, but it would seem surprising to me that FreeBSD's installed base >>is growing and mailing list traffic isn't. We have no method for >>estimating the number of installed FreeBSD boxes, but I would have >>thought that mailing list traffic was quite a good indicator. >> >> > >Statistics are available and have been posted from time to time in the >past. CD sales, FTP downloads, website traffic from FreeBSD clients, >Netcraft webserver counts, etc. I don't recall any other indications >of shrinking user base (on the contrary, my memory is that they >support robust growth). > > Apart from Netcraft, do you have any links to these sources please? I would love to see some of the statistics. > > >>Perhaps we're just so good and documenting now, that nobody needs to ask >>a question? ;) >> >> > >Don't underestimate that possibility. A hell of a lot of work has >gone into improving the documentation, and a lot of mailing list >traffic is in the category of newbie questions that are answered in >the documentation. > >Kris > I strongly agree with what Kris said, the documentation team have done a fantastic job in enabling then to finding quick and simple answers to most newbie questions. -Liam Foy From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 12:05:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D37616A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:05:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-67-119-53-122.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5C143D54 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:05:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7B87566DF2; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:05:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:05:19 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: Liam Foy Message-ID: <20040125200519.GA28442@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <401420AE.9060702@sepulcrum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jRHKVT23PllUwdXP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <401420AE.9060702@sepulcrum.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: chat@freebsd.org cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:05:22 -0000 --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 08:01:50PM +0000, Liam Foy wrote: > >Statistics are available and have been posted from time to time in the > >past. CD sales, FTP downloads, website traffic from FreeBSD clients, > >Netcraft webserver counts, etc. I don't recall any other indications > >of shrinking user base (on the contrary, my memory is that they > >support robust growth). > >=20 > > > Apart from Netcraft, do you have any links to these sources please? I=20 > would love > to see some of the statistics. Unfortunately not..some have been posted on mailing lists in the past. Kris --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAFCF/Wry0BWjoQKURAo3rAKDmNHO0u4dFaeV4WnBAl6nA0y9eAwCeK92W 11Yd/z1p/Wj4LBKB7d+HBHs= =HgVL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 12:26:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68FE616A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:26:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from papagena.rockefeller.edu (user-0cdfenm.cable.mindspring.com [24.215.186.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5293543D1F for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:26:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@online.fr) Received: (qmail 2778 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Jan 2004 20:26:06 -0000 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 15:26:06 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: "Gary W. Swearingen" Message-ID: <20040125202606.GA2735@online.fr> References: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.23 i686 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:26:03 -0000 > While it's probably low risk to assume that some private derivatives > are not subject to the "all third parties" clause, I think I see your confusion: that clause says if you distribute it to anyone else, you must license it to all third parties. That means you cannot stop it from being redistributed -- whoever receives it has your permission to pass it on further under the GPL. It does not mean that you must hand out a copy to whoever asks for it, or that anyone in the world can demand source code from you. Read the FAQ, in particular http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLRequireAvailabilityToPublic You may say "that's the FSF's interpretation", but it's been gone over by their lawyers, and it's totally obvious you're not a lawyer, so either believe the FSF or find a lawyer who supports your interpretations. Rahul From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 13:49:27 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E90E16A4CF for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:49:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net (imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.59.71]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B979743D45 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:49:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aacf1qb02@sneakemail.com) Received: from vwinxp ([68.219.173.144]) by imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20040125214923.YDGD1953.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@vwinxp> for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:49:23 -0500 From: "Chip Morton" To: Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:49:47 -0500 Organization: ThreeSpace Corporation Message-ID: <002801c3e38d$273e3cf0$5b01a8c0@vwinxp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Secure Internet E-Mail v1.0 Beta In-Reply-To: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Subject: RE: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:49:27 -0000 Speaking of essay e-mail writers and quieter lists, where is Terry Lambert these days? -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Boothman andrew-at-cream.org |FreeBSD List/Sneakemail.Rule.FreeBSD| Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 11:11 AM To: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists Hi everybody, I've just noticed an interesting fact. If you visit the mailing list archives on http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ you'll notice that in 2003 there were 20,000 less messages to FreeBSD.org mailing lists compared to 2002. That's a fall of about 8% (Although we did still manage to increase the total size of those emails - thanks to all those essay email writers! :-) That's the first time since FreeBSD began that there's been a fall in numbers. Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no question that there's more than enough development going on in all the BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... Discuss. :) Andrew _______________________________________________ freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 14:01:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8549516A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:01:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from 82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk (82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk [82.41.27.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86C4043D1D for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:01:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrew@cream.org) Received: from cream.org (spatula.flat [192.168.0.2]) by myriad.flat (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27089BA; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 20:53:25 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:01:39 +0000 From: Andrew Boothman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:01:32 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:38:37PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > > >>Agreed, but it would seem surprising to me that FreeBSD's installed base >>is growing and mailing list traffic isn't. We have no method for >>estimating the number of installed FreeBSD boxes, but I would have >>thought that mailing list traffic was quite a good indicator. > > > Statistics are available and have been posted from time to time in the > past. CD sales, FTP downloads, website traffic from FreeBSD clients, > Netcraft webserver counts, etc. I don't recall any other indications > of shrinking user base (on the contrary, my memory is that they > support robust growth). I'm glad if that's the case. I don't feel that FreeBSD constantly chases market share in the same way that a certain penguin-oriented OS does, but no one would be happy to hear that we had a decreasing user base. >>Perhaps we're just so good and documenting now, that nobody needs to ask >>a question? ;) > > > Don't underestimate that possibility. A hell of a lot of work has > gone into improving the documentation, and a lot of mailing list > traffic is in the category of newbie questions that are answered in > the documentation. FreeBSD does have excellent documentation, I always kick myself when I work something out on my own and then realise a few days later that it was all laid out in the handbook for me. Perhaps this does adequately explain decreasing list traffic... Andrew From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 14:50:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F4EB16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:50:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from rsmba.biz (evrtwa1-ar19-4-41-158-208.evrtwa1.dsl-verizon.net [4.41.158.208]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 16FC043D39 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:50:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rschi@rsmba.biz) Received: (qmail 629 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2004 22:50:19 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO foghorn.rsmba.biz) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 25 Jan 2004 22:50:19 -0000 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:50:18 -0800 From: Richard Schilling To: wine-license@winehq.org, chat@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040125225018.GO348@foghorn.rsmba.biz> References: <1075057551.16114.165.camel@griffin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Balsa 1.4.4 Lines: 87 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Ossi] New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License[rschi@rsmba.biz][rschilling@nationalinformatics.net] X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:50:44 -0000 I'm forwarding this message onto this list because this is where the thread belongs. I apologise for posting to active development lists. ----- Begin Forwarded Message ----- Date: 2004.01.25 14:27 Subject: Re: [Ossi] New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License[rschi@rsmba.biz] From: Richard Schilling The purpose of the license is very simple. It clarifies that the job of providing value-added, support, and other services for a software product is the job of the original developers and not others. If the original developers want to transfer that right then they can. It's the original developers' job to provide service, training, support, custom development, and value added services like web hosting using their product. It is not acceptable in my view for a software developer to work on a software product just so some other company can try to make a living by running their website with that software. It is the responsibility, however, of the software developer to make sure that the training, services, and value-added whatever are provided in a quality way. It is not the goal of this license to allow a high school student to use a developer's software product to earn money by programming. It's the goal of this license to ensure that my highly trained employees with MBAs and masters degrees have a means to be paid for their time on a project, and to protect that means indefinitely. On 2004.01.25 11:05 Robert Munro wrote: > > A non-contractual software license rests on the rights of the copyright > holder, but Open Source copyleft licenses operate by granting of rights > not by imposing contract terms like submitting back changes and servicer > restrictions, sole-source distribution requirements and control of code. > I think this is a source of confusion for many who read this license, Robert. This license is not a copyleft license. It's permission a developer can give the end user to use his/her software while retaining the exclusive right to provide services for hire on the product. The purpose of this license is to let the developer earn money for services. Is it a barrier for other companies who want to provide services on that developer's product? You bet. > Some features of the proposal are also unenforceable just as a matter of > practicality. If the users have the source code, how do you propose to > restrict who will work on that? Obviously you can't, not in real life. Obviously if the product is distributed illegally but secretly there's no way to detect the violation. Any seller of books has this problem. It's a question of what agreement you have in place when you finally do discover the problem, and it's a question of making it publically and contractually clear what the developer wants. > In fact, such a servicer restriction (#4) would operate counter to users > compliance with point #3, that "any" modifications have to be submitted > back to the developer. If a user has a non-approved programmer resolve > a bug, do you actually expect them to admit it by submitting code back? I would suggest that any potential contributor work directly with the initial developer to resolve any issues. If the developer really wants help then he/she should be expected to allow the contributor to license their work in a similar fashion. For example, if I write software under this license, and I need help, I am going to be able to offer some kind of living wage to the contributor because I know that I am always going to be the primary source for services related to the product. Everyone on the development team gets paid. Can the project stall if no one wants to pay me and my contributors for our time? Sure you bet - that's called a lack of demand and it means we'll invest our time into something else. > > Open Source users contribute code back to active projects because that's > less work than reintegrating their local modifications after an upgrade, > and for other reasons such as pride of authorship and genuine altruism. > They also have security of knowing that a valuable Open Source software > product likely won't disappear if the vendor company folds or otherwise > ceases maintaining and improving the software. The proposal kills this, > in points #4 thru #6. Those would also tend to cripple users incentive > to contribute to the software, since they could not be assured continued > access to the evolving product. What happens if you go out of business? If I go out of business I can transfer the rights of the license to someone else or sell them. You're right, there is a danger in having a product simply dissappear - the same problem we would have with cars if a particular car manufacturer dissappeared. We would not have that make of car available anymore. But, I maintain that as long as the original development team can get paid for their time this is much less likely to happen. > > These observations don't include the apparent conflict between points #4 > through #6 and #8 with #7, that all contributors retain their copyrights > to their own code. Your proposal would take away most of their rights, > so it's a little disingenuous to claim that they'd somehow retain those. Not at all. You can retain copyright to your work and still negotiate a license for someone to use your work. For example, if a person wants to contribute something to my original work, I don't need his/her copyrights. What I need is permission from that person to include their work. And, of course the contributor would be wise to negotiate some kind of wage for his/her time in making the contribution. > > Point #8 is simply unnecessary. One of the major problems popular Open > Source projects have is the overloading of main distribution servers at > significant upgrades. Unauthorized, corrupted mirrors are almost never > encountered. Users most typically have to be begged to use FTP mirrors. > Allowing a high school student to download my code, change it and put it on their server is not enough quality control for my taste. This point is ackward for many I know, but as we release products and people see the quality is there this won't be an issue. > I'd respectfully suggest that you think about what you really want your > alternative license to accomplish, what rights in copyright you control > and can license (as opposed to specifying under software contract terms) > to your users, and rely more on user incentives inherent in Open Source. > > Since the GPL permits dual-licensing, you might look into that approach. > Thanks for the suggestion - we do constantly review the existing licenses to determine what is best for our customers and employees. Dual licensing under the GPL presents too many complications and expense for use to manage it efficiently. Richard Schilling ----- End Forwarded Message ----- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 15:12:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46AD916A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 15:12:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from 82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk (82-41-27-158.cable.ubr04.edin.blueyonder.co.uk [82.41.27.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30C6643D31 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 15:12:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrew@cream.org) Received: from cream.org (spatula.flat [192.168.0.2]) by myriad.flat (Postfix) with ESMTP id E06E3BA; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:04:08 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <40144D57.3010609@cream.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:12:23 +0000 From: Andrew Boothman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chip Morton References: <002801c3e38d$273e3cf0$5b01a8c0@vwinxp> In-Reply-To: <002801c3e38d$273e3cf0$5b01a8c0@vwinxp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:12:09 -0000 Chip Morton wrote: > Speaking of essay e-mail writers and quieter lists, where is Terry > Lambert these days? Funny I was just thinking the exact same thing the other day when a search of mine turned up one of his posts. Perhaps he accounts for out messing 20,000 messages ;) Anybody know what happened to him? Andrew From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 16:40:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9255C16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:40:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail1.acecape.com (mail1.acecape.com [66.114.74.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75CEA43D2D for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:40:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lists@natserv.com) Received: from p65-147.acedsl.com (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mail1.acecape.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0Q0eStS003491; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:40:31 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:42:10 +0000 (GMT) From: Francisco Reyes X-X-Sender: fran@zoraida.natserv.net To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: <20040125194026.O13956@zoraida.natserv.net> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:40:40 -0000 On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 07:38:37PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > > > Agreed, but it would seem surprising to me that FreeBSD's installed base > > is growing and mailing list traffic isn't. .... > Don't underestimate that possibility. A hell of a lot of work has > gone into improving the documentation, and a lot of mailing list > traffic is in the category of newbie questions that are answered in > the documentation. > Kris There are also more books than in previous years out. There is also more places people can exchange information about their favorite BSD in several forums. Although impossible to measure I would think that at least in part some of the list traffic has now been moved to forums like bsdforums.com From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 17:56:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0050B16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:56:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from pengo.systems.pipex.net (pengo.systems.pipex.net [62.241.160.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E96E343D1D for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:56:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mark@thuvia.org) Received: from dotar.thuvia.org (81-86-231-114.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.231.114]) by pengo.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49064C000B8; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:56:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dotar.thuvia.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dotar.thuvia.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0Q1usag064106; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:56:54 GMT (envelope-from mark@dotar.thuvia.org) Received: (from mark@localhost) by dotar.thuvia.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i0Q1uset064105; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:56:54 GMT (envelope-from mark) Message-Id: <200401260156.i0Q1uset064105@dotar.thuvia.org> From: Mark Valentine Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:56:54 +0000 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 beta(5) 10/07/98) To: mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org (Mark Ovens), chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OMG!!!!!! X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:56:58 -0000 > From: mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org (Mark Ovens) > Date: Sun 25 Jan, 2004 > Subject: OMG!!!!!! > Now we know for certain that Britain has gone stark staring mad...... > > http://tinyurl.com/2teet > > but then Betty is getting on a bit, obviously going senile. Hmm, if I thought it meant anything I might be tempted to draft my first ever letter to my MP... What next - Sir Ronald Biggs? Cheers, Mark. -- "Tigers will do ANYTHING for a tuna fish sandwich." "We're kind of stupid that way." *munch* *munch* -- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 21:24:59 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0752616A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02B843D41 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-17-47-224.client.comcast.net[24.17.47.224]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with ESMTP id <2004012605245601200a5v3ne>; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:24:56 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0Q5OIYS068578; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0Q5OCRU068577; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: Rahul Siddharthan References: <20040125195023.GA2469@online.fr> From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:12 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20040125195023.GA2469@online.fr> (Rahul Siddharthan's message of "Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:50:23 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:24:59 -0000 Rahul Siddharthan writes: > I strongly suggest you read it and think about it for yourself. [...] > You don't require its permission for that. If you legally have a copy > of it, you can do what you like to it, just as if you legally > purchased a book, you may scribble on its margins. You are wrong. If you legally have a copy of it, you can do what you agreed to do with it, else you've violated your copyright license agreement to copy, derive, and/or and publish. [...] > Try reading up, just a little, on copyright law. I strongly suggest that you try being just a little less patronizing. I've read more than enough about copyright law and software licenses and the GPL to not appreciate people treating me like an ignoramus. And you should know that by now. If you can't follow my arguments or don't want to argue with them, just ignore me or give your own and keep your insulting comments to youself. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 21:46:52 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C0E16A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:46:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47C0D43D39 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:46:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-17-47-224.client.comcast.net[24.17.47.224]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <2004012605465001400e6mgke>; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:46:50 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0Q5kCYS068883; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:46:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0Q5k66q068882; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:46:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: Rahul Siddharthan References: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> <20040125202606.GA2735@online.fr> From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:46:06 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20040125202606.GA2735@online.fr> (Rahul Siddharthan's message of "Sun, 25 Jan 2004 15:26:06 -0500") Message-ID: <97d697s1nl.697@mail.comcast.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:46:52 -0000 >> While it's probably low risk to assume that some private derivatives >> are not subject to the "all third parties" clause, Rahul Siddharthan writes: > I think I see your confusion: No, you don't. > that clause says if you distribute it to > anyone else, you must license it to all third parties. No, it doesn't say that. It say if distribute it or publish it. We know what "publish" means, but we don't know what distribute means (to non-FSF licensors); even whether it is limited to "anyone else". > That means you > cannot stop it from being redistributed -- whoever receives it has > your permission to pass it on further under the GPL. It does not mean > that you must hand out a copy to whoever asks for it, or that anyone > in the world can demand source code from you. That's not my confusion and I doubt if it was the OP's; I think he was just being very loose in his language and I thought it was wrong of you to take it so literally and not read between his lines. I was going to say that before but wanted to keep it short and less accusatory. (I guess I shouldn't have worried about that.) It was fairly obvious to me that he was worried about licenses and didn't care a bit about any requirements to provide source to anyone, despite his literal words. > You may say "that's the FSF's interpretation", but it's been gone over > by their lawyers, and it's totally obvious you're not a lawyer, so > either believe the FSF or find a lawyer who supports your > interpretations. But in most cases, the FSF's lawyer's are irrelevant. It's the licensor who may threaten to sick his lawyer on you. If his lawyer's get into the picture, it's too late for most people, and if it's not his lawyers are going to have their own theories of what the GPL meant to his client. BTW, I've read enough of the FSF's lawyer's crackpot writing to have little respect for his opinion about anything. The guy thinks that GPL'd software is not proprietary, for cryin' out loud. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 25 22:37:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552C716A4CE for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from papagena.rockefeller.edu (user-0cdfenm.cable.mindspring.com [24.215.186.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C9F5043D39 for ; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:37:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@online.fr) Received: (qmail 6656 invoked by uid 1002); 26 Jan 2004 06:37:47 -0000 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:37:47 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: "Gary W. Swearingen" Message-ID: <20040126063747.GA6603@online.fr> References: <20040125170439.GA1533@online.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.23 i686 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 06:37:44 -0000 Gary W. Swearingen wrote: [context: making private modifications to GPL code] > > You don't require its permission for that. If you legally have a copy > > of it, you can do what you like to it, just as if you legally > > purchased a book, you may scribble on its margins. > > You are wrong. If you legally have a copy of it, you can do what you > agreed to do with it, else you've violated your copyright license > agreement to copy, derive, and/or and publish. Do you have any evidence for this -- a law, or a precedent case? You'll find citations to the contrary (law, and legal precedent) in the DJB link I sent earlier (http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html). Copyright law deals with copying. It does not deal with modification. It is just as legal to modify software you own and have paid for, as it is to modify a book you own, as long as you don't plan to make additional copies. There are also substantial fair-use rights that allow making copies for some purposes; see http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html (for works of art) and http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html (for computer programs). This applies to commercial software too, but the GPL allows unrestricted reproduction for personal use, so the above items aren't relevant. It is true that laws have recently been passed that substantially infringe on fair use (eg, the DMCA), but I'm not aware of any laws that impact the GPL or this issue. It is also true that corporations try to get around the fair-use problem by imposing click-through agreements to take away your rights; it is not clear to what extent these things are legally valid. And again, the GPL does not do this: it is a license covering redistribution *only*, not use. It is not a mutual agreement or a contract; at no stage are you asked to agree to anything before using the software. You can take it (and the rights it gives you to distribute) or leave it (no right to distribute) but it does not change your existing rights. Do not confuse click-through agreements with free software licenses. So, if you believe that you can't legally modify code for private use unless the GPL explicitly permits you to do so: explain why you think so, with evidence, please. > I've read more than enough about copyright law and software licenses > and the GPL to not appreciate people treating me like an ignoramus. Tough. Next time, try backing up your arguments with something more than emotion. Rahul From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 00:17:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C059816A4CE; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:17:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns3.bangla.net (ns3.bangla.net [203.188.252.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE1F43D41; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:17:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from abulfazl@juniv.edu) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ns3.bangla.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with UUCP id i0Q86xr04680; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:06:59 +0600 Received: from Imrashi.net.bd ([192.168.1.254]) by juniv.edu (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i0QDCvm08730; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:12:57 GMT Received: by Imrashi.net.bd (Postfix, from userid 1001) id EF9D7421F; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:31:13 +0600 (BDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:31:13 +0600 From: Progga To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.Org Message-ID: <20040126133113.A235@Imrashi.net.bd> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.6.2-RELEASE i386 X-PGP-Key: hkp://pgp.mit.edu X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: mojahed@agni.com cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.Org Subject: Pants ported to FreeBSD :-) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:17:50 -0000 --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Now we can wear pants too ;-) Script attached. Khoda Hafez Progga --y0ulUmNC+osPPQO6-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 01:44:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E9C16A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:44:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from crf-consulting.co.uk (82-44-220-218.cable.ubr10.haye.blueyonder.co.uk [82.44.220.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0774D43D2D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:44:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nik@crf-consulting.co.uk) Received: from clan.nothing-going-on.org (clan.nothing-going-on.org [192.168.1.20])i0Q9ipJ6054020; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:44:51 GMT (envelope-from nik@catkin) Received: from clan.nothing-going-on.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0Q9jD9b054205; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:45:13 GMT (envelope-from nik@clan.nothing-going-on.org) Received: (from nik@localhost)i0Q9jCZ0054204; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:45:12 GMT (envelope-from nik) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:45:12 +0000 From: Nik Clayton To: Andrew Boothman Message-ID: <20040126094512.GB54016@clan.nothing-going-on.org> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: FreeBSD Project cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:44:56 -0000 --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 04:11:09PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no=20 > question that there's more than enough development going on in all the=20 > BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing=20 > list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that=20 > too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? The documentation's improved so much that there's less need for people to ask questions on the mailing lists... N --=20 FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ (__) FreeBSD Documentation Project http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/ \\\'',) \/ \= ^ --- 15B8 3FFC DDB4 34B0 AA5F 94B7 93A8 0764 2C37 E375 --- .\._/= _) --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAFOGok6gHZCw343URAh3+AKCSXO+HSeV8nKeBDGh7TOcF3TXS/gCdEP5V dC3ldaxvDLPW5wUZ8n9Q+hM= =Tyuh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4bRzO86E/ozDv8r1-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 01:45:47 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6522316A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:45:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from crf-consulting.co.uk (82-44-220-218.cable.ubr10.haye.blueyonder.co.uk [82.44.220.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E2443D1D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:45:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nik@crf-consulting.co.uk) Received: from clan.nothing-going-on.org (clan.nothing-going-on.org [192.168.1.20])i0Q9jiJ6054026; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:45:44 GMT (envelope-from nik@catkin) Received: from clan.nothing-going-on.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0Q9k69b054218; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:46:06 GMT (envelope-from nik@clan.nothing-going-on.org) Received: (from nik@localhost)i0Q9k5Ao054217; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:46:05 GMT (envelope-from nik) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:46:05 +0000 From: Nik Clayton To: Andrew Boothman Message-ID: <20040126094605.GC54016@clan.nothing-going-on.org> References: <002801c3e38d$273e3cf0$5b01a8c0@vwinxp> <40144D57.3010609@cream.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40144D57.3010609@cream.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: FreeBSD Project cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:45:47 -0000 --Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 11:12:23PM +0000, Andrew Boothman wrote: > Chip Morton wrote: > >Speaking of essay e-mail writers and quieter lists, where is Terry > >Lambert these days? >=20 > Funny I was just thinking the exact same thing the other day when a=20 > search of mine turned up one of his posts. >=20 > Perhaps he accounts for out messing 20,000 messages ;) >=20 > Anybody know what happened to him? Last I heard, working for Apple. N --=20 FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ (__) FreeBSD Documentation Project http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/ \\\'',) \/ \= ^ --- 15B8 3FFC DDB4 34B0 AA5F 94B7 93A8 0764 2C37 E375 --- .\._/= _) --Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAFOHdk6gHZCw343URAl/eAKCQXNKbMpAlHlc3PgsxnrgqDXk7pQCdE9x5 XwkxFzDf3k2Pet/8hJOknf4= =x9SL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 04:16:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9426516A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7520B43D2D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:16:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 329945309; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:16:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id 071E75308; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:16:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 764C433C9C; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:16:34 +0100 (CET) To: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) References: <20040125195023.GA2469@online.fr> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:16:34 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Gary W. Swearingen's message of "Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:24:12 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.61 (1.212.2.1-2003-12-09-exp) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: ss X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK, RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.61 cc: Rahul Siddharthan cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 12:16:48 -0000 underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) writes: > Rahul Siddharthan writes: > > You don't require its permission for that. If you legally have a copy > > of it, you can do what you like to it, just as if you legally > > purchased a book, you may scribble on its margins. > You are wrong. If you legally have a copy of it, you can do what you > agreed to do with it, else you've violated your copyright license > agreement to copy, derive, and/or and publish. No. The right to modify etc. that the law grants you cannot be repealed by the license; if the license says you can't modify or reverse-engineer the software (for your own use), the license is wrong and unenforceable. Likewise if it says you can't publish reviews or benchmarks without the author's permission. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 05:23:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D512616A51C for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:23:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from hannibal.servitor.co.uk (hannibal.servitor.co.uk [195.188.15.48]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB5243D49 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:23:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from paul@iconoplex.co.uk) Received: from hannibal.servitor.co.uk ([195.188.15.48] helo=iconoplex.co.uk) by hannibal.servitor.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Al6iX-00086o-P9; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:23:54 +0000 Message-ID: <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:23:31 +0000 From: Paul Robinson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Boothman References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> In-Reply-To: <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:23:58 -0000 Andrew Boothman wrote: > I'm glad if that's the case. I don't feel that FreeBSD constantly > chases market share in the same way that a certain penguin-oriented OS > does, but no one would be happy to hear that we had a decreasing user > base. How about an extra bit in the install scripts that prompts the user to "ping" the FreeBSD servers with some useful data? If the user is happy to do so, it sends output of uname -v over UDP to a box somewhere in *.freebsd.org. The server then collects the figures and can then start providing better figures about take-up of versions which would be useful for both developers and those trying to understand FreeBSD usage "in the wild". If this information was sent out periodically after a make installworld as well, then up-to-date information about which releases and builds are being used out there could be made available and would "retro-fit" to those who don't use /stand/sysinstall any more, but just cvs to the build they want. This could be extended to sending output of dmesg to give developers an idea of which hardware is being used too, perhaps even with a dump of ps so we could see whether the box was being used for web, ftp, etc.... as long as we show the user what we're about to send to the FreeBSD.org servers, and offer them the chance to say "no", I don't think this would cause massive problems. Oh, one other thing - so that laptops that move around and other systems that come up on dynamic IP get counted only once, we'd need to also send something unique to the machine in the data - a MAC address or Processor serial number. The latter would be ideal, but not sure how easy this would be to implement in our multi-platform world. The UDP server to do take the data and append it to a file is tiny in Python. I'm happy to volunteer to manage the data and produce the stats on a monthly basis. Anybody interested in this? > FreeBSD does have excellent documentation, I always kick myself when I > work something out on my own and then realise a few days later that it > was all laid out in the handbook for me. > > Perhaps this does adequately explain decreasing list traffic... The project is becoming mature, it's as simple as that. Good reasons for mailing list traffic decreasing: 1. Documentation answers nearly all user questions these days. Kudos to those guys. 2. The code itself is crashing less and working with more kit than before. 3. There are extensive archives out there that will answer almost any questions you have. 4. We're all getting better at finding answers ourselves and we're not as novice as we once were. 5. ports and pkg_add reduce the number of questions about how to install "this package" on FreeBSD. Number 3 is my favourite - I stuck a new HDD in my laptop the other day and couldn't remember how to get the on-board sound working properly. Before firing off a request to the lists I googled for an answer, found a post and sat reading it thinking "gosh, this is exactly what I needed, and it's quite well structured as a response too...". I was about to send the author a quick note off-list to thank him for writing such an authoritative response (always good to praise where due), then spotted the author was me. I wrote the post in answer to somebody else two years ago. :-) So, there, that's at least two e-mails I saved just last week. -- Paul Robinson From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 05:37:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 334F016A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:37:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk (tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E81343D54 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:37:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk) Received: from scan1.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.166] helo=localhost) by tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Al6vJ-0000iP-Gy for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:37:05 +0000 Received: from rx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.165]) by localhost (scan1.oucs.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.166]) (amavisd-new, port 25) with ESMTP id 02704-02 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:37:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.161.253]) by rx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Al6vJ-0000iJ-3b for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:37:05 +0000 Received: (qmail 25717 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jan 2004 13:37:05 -0000 Received: from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk by gateway by uid 71 with qmail-scanner-1.16 (sweep: 2.14/3.71. spamassassin: 2.53. Clear:. Processed in 4.30973 secs); 26 Jan 2004 13:37:05 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk via gateway X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.16 (Clear:. Processed in 4.30973 secs) Received: from dhcp1131.wadham.ox.ac.uk (HELO piii600.wadham.ox.ac.uk) (163.1.161.131) by gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk with SMTP; 26 Jan 2004 13:37:00 -0000 Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> X-Sender: cperciva@imap.sfu.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:36:54 +0000 To: Paul Robinson From: Colin Percival In-Reply-To: <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:37:08 -0000 It's *fewer* messages, not *less* messages! At 13:23 26/01/2004, Paul Robinson wrote: >How about an extra bit in the install scripts that prompts the >user to "ping" the FreeBSD servers with some useful data? I'd say that a more useful option would be to add code which "pings" a server every day with a request for binary security updates. Colin Percival From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 06:30:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A445116A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 06:30:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from hannibal.servitor.co.uk (hannibal.servitor.co.uk [195.188.15.48]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AFDF43D39 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 06:30:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from paul@iconoplex.co.uk) Received: from hannibal.servitor.co.uk ([195.188.15.48] helo=iconoplex.co.uk) by hannibal.servitor.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Al7lS-0008PY-Mq; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:30:58 +0000 Message-ID: <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:30:32 +0000 From: Paul Robinson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Colin Percival References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:30:55 -0000 Colin Percival wrote: > It's *fewer* messages, not *less* messages! I've just nicked your wallet you toff! :-) > I'd say that a more useful option would be to add code which > "pings" a server every day with a request for binary security > updates. Oooh.... now we're heading into the realms of Windows Update, and we know how badly that can behave at times. As long as it was completely optional, in fact something that sits in ports and not base, I'd think that would work OK. The problem is, with so many builds out there on so many platforms, linked with so many libraries, you can't just dispatch a list of MD5s and know a particular item is "broken". -- Paul Robinson From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 08:41:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE2916A4D0 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:41:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C248543D39 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:41:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rpratt1950@earthlink.net) Received: from user68.net585.fl.sprint-hsd.net ([65.41.6.68] helo=kt.weeble.com) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Al9nq-0005J8-00; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:41:35 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:42:30 -0500 From: Randy Pratt To: Andrew Boothman Message-Id: <20040126114230.0d712ccb.rpratt1950@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 16:41:43 -0000 On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 16:11:09 +0000 you wrote: > Hi everybody, > I've just noticed an interesting fact. If you visit the mailing list > archives on http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ you'll notice that in 2003 > there were 20,000 less messages to FreeBSD.org mailing lists compared > to 2002. That's a fall of about 8% (Although we did still manage to > increase the total size of those emails - thanks to all those essay > email writers! :-) > > That's the first time since FreeBSD began that there's been a fall in > numbers. > > Now - I'm not trying to start a "BSD is dying!" thread, there's no > question that there's more than enough development going on in all the > BSDs to counter that - but I would expect the total number of mailing > list posts to vary approximately to the OSs installed base. Or is that > too simplistic a view and I'm just worrying unnecessarily? > > I've been thinking for a while that -questions "feels" quieter. Or > perhaps I'm just getting used to the message flow... As others have mention, the documentation gets much better all the time and the search engines are probably a bit better at finding more relevant postings than in the past. One thing that has not been mentioned is that you see very few one line posts with only the content "man foo" as in the past. It was very common several years ago. The higher quality content of responses to questions has probably decreased the necessity of follow-up questions and explanations. These one line posts probably contributed to the higher numbers in several ways. Perhaps Greg Lehey's weekly posting of "How to get the best results.." is encouraging more people to do research on their own or ask better questions in the first place. I know from experience that there are very few instances where I could not find an answer from the archives or at least enough information to get me going in the right direction. Perhaps there is a silent "buddy system" growing where someone takes it upon themselves to mentor a new user. I've been doing this for a few years and have helped about 5 new people thru some rough spots to the point they can now generally help themselves. I'm sure that cut the number of postings down. As a side benefit, I also learned a lot myself during the process: To teach is to learn twice. Perhaps the 4.x branch has had enough questions asked such that most of the common questions/answers have been archived and are easily found. It may skyrocket when 5.x becomes the mainstay and there are less people familar with it. I just don't think there is any coorelation between the number of postings and the number of users. There are far too many factors affecting the posting count to draw any conclusions from it. Best regards, Randy -- There is no .sig better than no sig From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 10:32:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BB616A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:32:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from twix.hotpop.com (twix.hotpop.com [38.113.3.71]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98E043D2D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:32:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rainbreath@hotpop.com) Received: from hotpop.com (kubrick.hotpop.com [38.113.3.103]) by twix.hotpop.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 47113C2CD01 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [82.151.127.252]) by smtp-1.hotpop.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761B91A012D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:28:56 +0300 To: chat@freebsd.org References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> From: Yuri GV Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> User-Agent: Opera7.23/FreeBSD M2 build 518 X-HotPOP: ----------------------------------------------- Sent By HotPOP.com FREE Email Get your FREE POP email at www.HotPOP.com ----------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:32:08 -0000 I just want to say that if we'd do it then let's download source code, not binaries. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that it still would be more Unix way of doing deals. Different peoples have different kernels compiled by themselves (like I do) and there is no guarantee that binary updates would not hang up a system. breath On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 14:30:32 +0000, Paul Robinson wrote: > Colin Percival wrote: > >> It's *fewer* messages, not *less* messages! > > > I've just nicked your wallet you toff! :-) > >> I'd say that a more useful option would be to add code which >> "pings" a server every day with a request for binary security >> updates. > > > Oooh.... now we're heading into the realms of Windows Update, and we > know how badly that can behave at times. As long as it was completely > optional, in fact something that sits in ports and not base, I'd think > that would work OK. The problem is, with so many builds out there on so > many platforms, linked with so many libraries, you can't just dispatch a > list of MD5s and know a particular item is "broken". > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 10:46:00 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A7116A4CF for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:46:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from tx3.oucs.ox.ac.uk (tx3.oucs.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6494E43D68 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:45:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk) Received: from scan3.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.166] helo=localhost) by tx3.oucs.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlBjN-0004DP-OQ for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:45:05 +0000 Received: from rx3.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.165]) by localhost (scan3.oucs.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.166]) (amavisd-new, port 25) with ESMTP id 15916-06 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:45:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.161.253]) by rx3.oucs.ox.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlBjN-0004DM-B1 for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:45:05 +0000 Received: (qmail 24190 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jan 2004 18:45:04 -0000 Received: from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk by gateway by uid 71 with qmail-scanner-1.16 (sweep: 2.14/3.71. spamassassin: 2.53. Clear:. Processed in 9.615512 secs); 26 Jan 2004 18:45:04 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk via gateway X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.16 (Clear:. Processed in 9.615512 secs) Received: from dhcp1131.wadham.ox.ac.uk (HELO piii600.wadham.ox.ac.uk) (163.1.161.131) by gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk with SMTP; 26 Jan 2004 18:44:54 -0000 Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126183938.046fcec0@imap.sfu.ca> X-Sender: cperciva@imap.sfu.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:44:48 +0000 To: Paul Robinson From: Colin Percival In-Reply-To: <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:46:01 -0000 At 14:30 26/01/2004, Paul Robinson wrote: >Colin Percival wrote: >> I'd say that a more useful option would be to add code which >>"pings" a server every day with a request for binary security >>updates. > >Oooh.... now we're heading into the realms of Windows Update, and >we know how badly that can behave at times. Yes and no. Windows Update can behave badly. But I'm not talking about Windows Update; I'm talking about FreeBSD Update, which is very well behaved (and *much* faster, for that matter). Colin Percival From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 10:50:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF60D16A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:50:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (A17-250-248-46.apple.com [17.250.248.46]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E56243D1D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:50:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lomion@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin07-en2 [10.13.10.152]) by smtpout.mac.com (8.12.6/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id i0QIoVEZ006520; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:50:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.116] (bgp585760bgs.jdover01.nj.comcast.net [68.39.198.236]) (authenticated bits=0)i0QIoN28027944; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:50:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126183938.046fcec0@imap.sfu.ca> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126183938.046fcec0@imap.sfu.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v609) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <7D8253A2-5030-11D8-9620-000393A335A2@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Lawrence Sica Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:50:20 -0500 To: Colin Percival X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.609) cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:50:35 -0000 On Jan 26, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > At 14:30 26/01/2004, Paul Robinson wrote: >> Colin Percival wrote: >>> I'd say that a more useful option would be to add code which >>> "pings" a server every day with a request for binary security >>> updates. >> >> Oooh.... now we're heading into the realms of Windows Update, and >> we know how badly that can behave at times. > > Yes and no. Windows Update can behave badly. But I'm not talking > about Windows Update; I'm talking about FreeBSD Update, which is very > well behaved (and *much* faster, for that matter). > > Colin Percival > > Ever see the OS X Software Update? It works really well. --Larry From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 10:57:15 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E3716A4E0 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:57:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk (tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A8143D5D for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:57:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk) Received: from scan1.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.166] helo=localhost) by tx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlBut-000549-Hu for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:56:59 +0000 Received: from rx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.165]) by localhost (scan1.oucs.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.166]) (amavisd-new, port 25) with ESMTP id 19447-01 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:56:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.161.253]) by rx1.oucs.ox.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlBut-000540-4L for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:56:59 +0000 Received: (qmail 27089 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jan 2004 18:56:56 -0000 Received: from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk by gateway by uid 71 with qmail-scanner-1.16 (sweep: 2.14/3.71. spamassassin: 2.53. Clear:. Processed in 5.604909 secs); 26 Jan 2004 18:56:56 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk via gateway X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.16 (Clear:. Processed in 5.604909 secs) Received: from dhcp1131.wadham.ox.ac.uk (HELO piii600.wadham.ox.ac.uk) (163.1.161.131) by gateway.wadham.ox.ac.uk with SMTP; 26 Jan 2004 18:56:49 -0000 Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126185301.046c5ae0@imap.sfu.ca> X-Sender: cperciva@imap.sfu.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:56:22 +0000 To: Lawrence Sica From: Colin Percival In-Reply-To: <7D8253A2-5030-11D8-9620-000393A335A2@mac.com> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126183938.046fcec0@imap.sfu.ca> <7D8253A2-5030-11D8-9620-000393A335A2@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:57:15 -0000 At 18:50 26/01/2004, Lawrence Sica wrote: >On Jan 26, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > > Yes and no. Windows Update can behave badly. But I'm not talking >>about Windows Update; I'm talking about FreeBSD Update, which is very >>well behaved (and *much* faster, for that matter). > >Ever see the OS X Software Update? It works really well. Is that the one which uses compressed cpio archives containing the new versions of any updated files? I guess it's ok if you *want* to waste bandwidth and your customers' time, but personally I like the factor-of-50 reduction in bandwidth which FreeBSD Update accomplishes by using binary diffs. Colin Percival From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 11:27:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCCE316A4CE for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:27:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C960043D3F for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:27:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-24-17-47-224.client.comcast.net[24.17.47.224]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20040126192711014004nd0pe>; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 19:27:11 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i0QJQTYS080590; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:26:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0QJQNpL080589; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:26:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) References: <20040125195023.GA2469@online.fr> From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:26:23 -0800 In-Reply-To: ( =?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav's_message_of?= "Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:16:34 +0100") Message-ID: <3ek73eqzog.73e@mail.comcast.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 19:27:24 -0000 des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes: > No. The right to modify etc. that the law grants you cannot be > repealed by the license; if the license says you can't modify or > reverse-engineer the software (for your own use), the license is wrong > and unenforceable. Likewise if it says you can't publish reviews or > benchmarks without the author's permission. The right to modify etc. that the law grants you is extremely limited; the law gives almost all of modification rights to the copyright owner. The limited rights were late additions to the copyright statute (17 USC 117) and a few courts have invalidated some aspects of the statutes, but it is not a settled matter. DMCA made some of that moot, reverse-engineering included, IIRC, with courts bowing to the clear intent of the Legislature that IP owners have control of how their property is used. The few limited rights relate to adapting software to enable it's as-intended usage on one's computers. (It's bad law, too narrow, yet too imprecise, seeming to be a poor attempt to put common usage in statute, relying on people's good sense to avoid litigation over it.) I haven't heard of any support for your last claim, with courts carving further such exceptions to the ability of parties to choose the terms of their own contracts. Generally, a license can have an an enforceable requirement that the licensee wear red shirts on Tuesdays, if that's what the two parties involved have agreed upon. I do recognize that some state commercial laws have some exceptions to this common contract law thinking, but I haven't heard that any mention software reviewing. And references? But even things allowed by law (fair use or otherwise) may be "prohibited" by licenses, as long as the licensor still has anything to license. Fair use law says that I can use one line from your program, but a license to use a whole work may be conditioned on my agreement to not use even one line from your program. Now I know some courts have tried to say this sort of thing is an attempt by state (contract) law to "exempt" federal (copyright) law, but AFAIK, that strange theory is going nowhere, and one shouldn't depend on it. (The fact that federal law allows one to wear a red shirt doesn't mean that a license can't prevent one from wearing one as a term of the license, for another example.) From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 5 22:34:42 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A72516A4CE for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:34:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from eagle.sharma-home.net (cpe-24-221-178-208.ca.sprintbbd.net [24.221.178.208]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3498444008 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:34:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from arun@sharma-home.net) Received: from sharma-home.net (unknown [192.168.1.194]) by eagle.sharma-home.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3376F80D5 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:35:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3FA9EB65.80607@sharma-home.net> From: Arun Sharma User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030901 Thunderbird/0.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: CVS hacks X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 06:34:42 -0000 X-Original-Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:34:13 -0800 X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 06:34:42 -0000 What kind of mechanisms exist in FreeBSD to defend against such attacks? http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0311.0/0627.html -Arun From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 12 10:34:32 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E87C16A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:34:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay01.ispgateway.de (smtprelay01.ispgateway.de [62.67.200.156]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653DD43FD7 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:34:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mail@synchron.org) Received: (qmail 27624 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2003 18:34:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO FIREBIRD) ([80.138.225.225]) (envelope-sender ) by smtprelay01.ispgateway.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 12 Nov 2003 18:34:27 -0000 From: Andi Scharfstein X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.6) CD5BF9353B3B7091 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1713907750.20031112193733@synchron.org> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <3FB27B9E.2000902@potentialtech.com> References: <20031112184850.0f752d52.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> <3FB27B9E.2000902@potentialtech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: The future of X? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Andi Scharfstein List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:34:32 -0000 X-Original-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:37:33 +0100 X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:34:32 -0000 Hi, > Isn't there another project trying to put together a replacement for X? > I thought it was called "Berlin", but I can't find it anywhere on the net, > so I can't be sure. It got renamed to Fresco, see http://www.fresco.org -- Bye: Andi S. mailto:mail@synchron.org