Menu
▾
▴
opencd-devel — Developer List
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(14) |
May
(172) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(11) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Andrew J B. <an...@bo...> - 2002-05-06 03:43:05
|
Thanks! I just whipped it up one night in excitement about the Project. Thanks for the comments. Yeah, I think probably strike that out. I fiddled trying to narrow the message down but it's probably best not to mention this. On to the "real stuff", do we have a submission db up yet? I think it's really important to "split the duties up" and give some cvs read/commit access to those for the distribution. I keep finding apps for security everyday, and would rather submit it to a db than the mailing list. Are we planning on this? Cheers Andy > Overall, this is really good! > > The only comment I have is that you may want to reword > the part about minimal penetration of OSS on the > desktop. > > As it is, it basically says that very few people use > OSS on the desktop. Anyone who reads that will > immediately begin to wonder why--you may very well > have talked the reader out of deploying OSS at this > point. > > I would either get rid of that statement altogether, > or downplay the lack of adoption. Then, I would > immediately and more strongly say that OpenCD is here > to change all that. > > My $0.02, > Dhruva > > --- Andrew J Boncek <an...@bo...> wrote: >> >> Thought I would offer up this very draft Sample >> Corporate Letter. I tried >> to formulate some items that a typical IT manager at >> a corporation would >> be concerned about or a CIO in general. Comments >> appreciated. >> >> -Andy >> >> DRAFT >> >> Sample Corporate Letter to Corporations about OpenCD >> (Draft by: an...@bo...) >> >> Executive Overview >> >> Many corporations around the globe are realizing the >> power of open >> source software and are merging free software >> applications into their >> proprietary IT networks. Additionally, open source >> operating systems, >> including Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD, are being >> used in a number of >> corporate information systems for web services, >> information security, and >> a variety of other server tasks. While open source >> operating systems are >> quickly being adopted in the server market, the >> penetration of open source >> operating systems and software is minimal at the >> users desktop. OpenCD >> brings the power and advantages of zero fee licenses >> and professional >> quality, secure software to the typical corporate >> user. The general >> absence of such an effort has somewhat slowed the >> widespread adoption of >> free software in the enterprise and has additionally >> made such wide scale >> adoption difficult to manage. OpenCD will provide an >> avenue for >> corporations to deploy software usable on current >> existing proprietary >> operating systems. >> >> Brief Overview of the OpenCD Project >> >> The OpenCD Project is a single distribution of >> selected open source >> software that is proven to work on proprietary >> operating systems. The >> potential savings for IT departments can be >> staggering and can >> significantly reduce the outlays for recurrent >> licensing structures and >> support needs. As IT departments are learning from >> current proprietary >> software support structures, the additional fees to >> add additional users, >> keep support for patches current, and other long >> term financial outlays >> can reduce the overall potential to upgrade to the >> latest software. >> OpenCD can be a professional quality installation >> with support built-in >> through the open source software community support >> structure with no >> additional costs. >> As stated from the Projects description, OpenCD >> uses the following >> criteria for the distribution: >> >> 1. A selection of high-quality open source software >> for proprietary >> operating systems. >> 2. No licensing fees. The project is composed >> entirely of open >> source free software. >> 3. OpenCD contains many useful mainstream >> applications such as office >> productivity applications and other workflow >> software that extends the >> enterprise. >> 4. The project uses professional quality >> installation methods. In >> addition, the project provides the potential for >> easy, centrally managed >> software distribution and revocation. >> 5. A professional quality uninstall: The software >> can be safely >> removed or upgraded from corporate computing >> systems. >> >> The above criteria allows for a high degree of >> quality control for the >> distribution. The CD uses entirely open source >> standards for software >> development of the interfaces and installations and >> keeps the exists free >> licensing structure intact. In addition, the OpenCD >> criteria is openly >> published and can empower the IT department with the >> ability to present >> the distribution to management with professional >> quality standards. OpenCD >> can ensure the proper and central adoption of >> high-quality open source >> software. >> >> Advantages of the OpenCD Distribution >> >> OpenCD presents the corporate enterprise with a >> central adoption strategy >> for integrating free software into existing >> operating systems. For IT >> departments, the challenge to present open source >> operating systems on the >> desktop has been difficult. Corporations have >> driven the proprietary >> operating system application development due to a >> centrally dominated >> market. With the rising availability of global >> software development >> collaboration through the Internet, better quality >> open source office >> applications, multimedia, and Internet programs on >> proprietary operating >> systems are on the rise and are currently being >> deployed in small scale IT >> efforts. OpenCD brings these applications to the >> enterprise with little >> cost to the corporation. >> The strength of the open source community in >> providing exceptional >> security is widely recognized. OpenCD takes >> advantage of open source >> projects that for example utilize code review >> practices, adopt >> international security guidelines, By its very >> nature, the open >> availability of the application code has greatly >> enhanced the security of >> these applications . >> Additionally, OpenCD provides IT managers with an >> easy system for >> inventory tracking of open software in use. In >> addition, it allows for >> the potential to track the use and impact of open >> source software in the >> corporation, thereby enabling the >> The OpenCD project uses a regular release schedule >> that allows IT >> departments a predictable timeframe to deploy open >> source software. With >> one CD distribution in use, the IT departments can >> do central integration >> testing, manage updates to the system, and prepare >> new systems for the >> next release. In the current open source >> environment, it is difficult for >> an IT department to properly manage and track >> updates of open source >> software. OpenCD provides this in the >> predictability and stability of a >> release schedule. >> >> Possible Concerns for the Corporate Network >> >> As many IT managers have come to realize in the past >> few years, >> most current open source software in the IT >> infrastructure is making it >> in through the back door (similar to the appearance >> of PDAs). OpenCD >> allows for IT departments to control the >> propagation of the software >> throughout the enterprise by distributing the >> software from the >> department. The distribution can be safely and >> statically distributed to >> user support groups for training and technical >> support activities. >> (Additions ) >> >> Conclusion >> >> The OpenCD Project provides the corporate >> infrastructure with a >> wide array of central distribution advantages and >> extends the capabilities >> current and future IT systems. The clear advantages >> of no-cost, high- >> quality software is being realized by corporations >> globally, and OpenCD >> continues these advantages through centrally >> evaluated software for use on >> existing corporate operating systems. In addition, >> the project >> specifically enables the general corporate user but >> still > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > http://health.yahoo.com |
|
From: Andrew J B. <an...@bo...> - 2002-05-06 03:35:59
|
I would have to agree on not including the source on the distribution CD for the user. However, there should be some easy way for the administrator to obtain a program + source or something to that effect. I have compiled OSS software on many different Windows versions, and it can be vastly different depending on the setups, etc. Especially for highly controlled versions of NT 4.0/2000 with SMS, it can be an intersting endeavour. I say: ditch for the user, keep for the admin. -Andy |
|
From: simon o. <nz...@ho...> - 2002-05-06 03:13:00
|
Are people aware of the Yabb site aswell as this one? There have been a couple of messages that I have read that are not on the other website. I haven't quite figured out the difference between the two, but that's probably because I've been half asleep most of the time I've been writing... :) fluidiot < message posted by an user using the Open Source Support Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > |
|
From: simon o. <nz...@ho...> - 2002-05-06 03:06:45
|
Come to http://www.opensourceware.net/cgi/yabb/YaBB.pl#realgeneral_cat Most discussions are going on there. Fluidiot < message posted by an user using the Open Source Support Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > |
|
From: Robert I. S. <ro...@wa...> - 2002-05-06 01:44:37
|
Hi everyone, I would like to say that I am really exited about this project. I learned about in on Slashdot and subscribed to this list on May 2nd. I have not yet visited the forums, but will soon. Is the main discussion on this list or on the forums? I live in the Netherlands (hence the subject title). I lack any programming skills and am not very creative with images or design. I have worked in IT for five years in systems programming so I do have some experience with 'making stuff work'. I tried Linux a couple of times, but went back to Windows every time mostly due to the lock-in effect that Microsoft currently has. Games, friend wants to scan/edit/print/mail a document in Office format, get my digital piano to work, help mum troubleshoot a problem over the phone. Need I go on? I try to educate people on the issues in this Microsoft dominated world. They listen, understand and agree and then go on with their lives. I can't really blame them and I don't. Many times I have installed an anti-virus product only to find out six months later that they didn't update their signature files. Patches and upgrades?? No way! If they do have a problem I am one phone call away and solve their problem. To make life easy for me and them, I usually install MS-IE and Office. Open file-formats and W3C-compliance are a small sacrifice when you also want to sleep and get out of the house. Right? Wrong! If this project succeeds, I will install OpenOffice and Mozilla for my parents and friends. You can fight ignorance and educate, but giving people the right tools will have a much bigger impact. (Did I mention it's free as in beer and speech?) I hope I can help make this a reality. I can evaluate software, test the distribution and write documentation. Not much of a hacker, I know, but maybe I can take the burden off people who do the Real Work. I will read all the information on this list and on the website and see where I can help. In the mean time, if something needs to get done, please let me know. Bob p.s. Note to self: be more concise in the future. |
|
From: Robert I. S. <ro...@wa...> - 2002-05-06 00:52:12
|
> >Ok, I think we're nearing agreement on this point. > >We seem to agree that the source should _not_ be on the main CD for >several good reasons. The remaining disagrement is a minor one. I see >3 options: > >1) We simply link places where the source can be obtained, from the CD >and from our web page > >2) We store the source at our own web site in individual zip files, one >for each app, and link to these. > >3) We can do 1., 2. and make an ISO with these source files, so that >people can burn it and distribute it easily. > >All of these meet the Licence requirements (I think), but if we chose >only #1, we might be seen as not pulling our weight, by telling people >to use the bandwith of the devel teams to get the source. > >- Henrik Hi everyone, This is my first message. I will introduce my self in a separate message to this list. I think we should go for option 1. And make sure the links to the source are well hidden from a casual user. Anyone looking for the source will probably know where to find it. Source, instructions for compilation and a lot of the developer websites will scare people off. They don't care about the +0.001(a-z) upgrade of a given application. They don't want to know about the source of all evil (pun intended). They don't care that new features are included in a nightly build. If there is a good reason for power users to daily/weekly install a new build, the application is not ready for prime time. I personally only install the milestone releases of Mozilla. I waited for OpenOffice to hit 1.0 etc. Storing sources on the website will make maintaining it a bitch. It only has real value if the sources are up to date (latest releases included, not only the ones which currently carry our seal of approval). This takes a lot of effort for instance in the case of Mozilla. Maybe with a lot of hard work we can have a good repository of source. But think about it. What happens if the site gets listed on Slashdot the first day an Openoffice or Mozilla milestone sees the light of day. How many potential users from our target audience will get a Host Not Reachable on that day and go to download.com and go for demo-, free- or shareware or just stick to what they already have. We should of course pay respect to the opensource initiative and the developers. I think we should include some well-worded advocacy pieces. It shouldn't get in the way of users who are not interested. And most importantly it should not bash Microsoft, AOL or anything else or try to prove superiority. But this is another discussion. The source-ISO has some benefits for the bandwidth-impaired. However trying to tackle that issue is aiming to high. We should be focused on one thing and one thing only. Change the world one step at a time and so on. Bob |
|
From: James S. <ja...@di...> - 2002-05-05 22:50:06
|
At 09:06 PM 05/05/2002, someone wrote: >We seem to agree that the source should _not_ be on the main CD for >several good reasons. The remaining disagrement is a minor one. OK OK. I'm convinced. It must be a high priority to have the source available somewhere though (which has been said). Nice to see open discussion about open source :) |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-05 22:47:09
|
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 07:54:09PM +0100, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 19:41, Martin Stevens wrote: > > > > Can the project leader make a summary of where we are up to and what > > are the next landmarks, so we can all start to pull in the right > > direction. > > > I'm not sure we have a single project leader :), but one central person > (in this case me) has written a newsletter in an attempt to sumarize > things. See theopencd.org D'oh Reminder to self, must read website and related material before posting :-) > > - Henrik > > -- > > Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford > 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road > Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP > h....@bt... he...@th... > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... > _______________________________________________ > Opencd-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencd-devel > -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-05 20:12:23
|
On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 21:16, Toby Inkster wrote: > On 05 May 2002 19:47:13 +0100 > Henrik Nilsen Omma <h....@bt...> wrote: > > HNO> > ISO (binaries): 200MB > HNO> > ISO (binaries + source): 500MB > HNO> > Chances of average Windows user wanting the source: 2000-to-1. > HNO> > HNO> I agree. Once more OSS is ported to win32 then there certainly wont > HNO> be space. Let's just set it up as 2 CDs from the start. > > Re-reading, I didn't make my point very clearly. > > What I meant was that including the source would more than double the size of the CD, so it's probably a bad idea to include it at all. Far better to link to the source from our website. Ok, I think we're nearing agreement on this point. We seem to agree that the source should _not_ be on the main CD for several good reasons. The remaining disagrement is a minor one. I see 3 options: 1) We simply link places where the source can be obtained, from the CD and from our web page 2) We store the source at our own web site in individual zip files, one for each app, and link to these. 3) We can do 1., 2. and make an ISO with these source files, so that people can burn it and distribute it easily. All of these meet the Licence requirements (I think), but if we chose only #1, we might be seen as not pulling our weight, by telling people to use the bandwith of the devel teams to get the source. - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Tom P. <tp...@xt...> - 2002-05-05 19:44:32
|
Hi, I'm a win32 programmer and a linux user ;-). I've been following the list for a last few days, but, thought I should just introduce myself. If there is any work needed to be done on the installer, or any apps you need coded, I'd be happy to give it a go. Same goes for any graphics you need doing. Well thats my bit, Tom. |
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-05 19:31:06
|
> There is another point: 200MB is twice as fast to download and twice as > fast to burn as 400MB. This is an advantage for those with slow lines, > AND if you making copies for your 50 nearest friends it saves lots of > time. The app CD will be distributed 50 times more often than the > development/source one, so this is a considerable saving. I'd like to humbly change my mind on this issue. Increasing the chance of redistribution is key. Shrinking the CD size for burning and or increasing the number of "stable/working" apps should be high on the list of priorities. That being said, it should promenanty be displayed in the GUI that 'you can get the source... here, here, and here...." & someone had best be in charge of making sure those sites don't go down due to neglect, waning interest, or any other reason. Providing this access could be tough. Does this exist for anyone now? -- Steve Mallett | http://OSDir.org - Just Stable, Open Source Apps st...@op... | web...@op... http://open5ource.net <personal> "To use Linux without criticizing it is to betray it." -Clay Shirky |
|
From: Toby I. <ta...@do...> - 2002-05-05 19:15:35
|
On 05 May 2002 19:47:13 +0100
Henrik Nilsen Omma <h....@bt...> wrote:
HNO> > ISO (binaries): 200MB
HNO> > ISO (binaries + source): 500MB
HNO> > Chances of average Windows user wanting the source: 2000-to-1.
HNO>
HNO> I agree. Once more OSS is ported to win32 then there certainly wont
HNO> be space. Let's just set it up as 2 CDs from the start.
Re-reading, I didn't make my point very clearly.
What I meant was that including the source would more than double the size of the CD, so it's probably a bad idea to include it at all. Far better to link to the source from our website.
--
Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A
jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink
On the menu of a Polish hotel: Salad a firm's own make; limpid red
beet soup with cheesy dumplings in the form of a finger; roasted duck
let loose; beef rashers beaten up in the country people's fashion.
|
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-05 18:59:35
|
On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 19:41, Martin Stevens wrote: > > Can the project leader make a summary of where we are up to and what > are the next landmarks, so we can all start to pull in the right > direction. > I'm not sure we have a single project leader :), but one central person (in this case me) has written a newsletter in an attempt to sumarize things. See theopencd.org - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-05 18:52:40
|
On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 20:30, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Sat, 04 May 2002 12:33:10 +0100 > James Shuttleworth <ja...@di...> wrote: > > JS> Does this mean people are considering *not* putting the source on > JS> the disk? I think not having it is not a good idea. > > ISO (binaries): 200MB > ISO (binaries + source): 500MB > Chances of average Windows user wanting the source: 2000-to-1. I agree. Once more OSS is ported to win32 then there certainly wont be space. Let's just set it up as 2 CDs from the start. One with hyper-friendly apps and installer, and one with source and devel tools - The OpecCD development companion CD (?) Many Linux distros are doing this, so were not being unorthodox. There is another point: 200MB is twice as fast to download and twice as fast to burn as 400MB. This is an advantage for those with slow lines, AND if you making copies for your 50 nearest friends it saves lots of time. The app CD will be distributed 50 times more often than the development/source one, so this is a considerable saving. There was a suggestion for having different flavors. My (revised) oppinion: We can have these flavors: Home - includes games Education - learning tools Office (no back office) These will have much overlap, and all should have certain core apps. OR, we can have 4 buttons as the first menu on the installer, giving a choice of the 3 categories and "Entire CD" I suggest we go with the second option for the first few CDs to keep it simple, and because the total is still only ~200-300MB. Then we can splitt it up later. - Henrik > > I think putting the source on the CDs is a terrible idea. > > -- > Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ > mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A > jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink > > In a Norwegian cocktail lounge: Ladies are requested not to have > children in the bar. -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-05 18:41:32
|
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 08:30:07PM +0100, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Sat, 04 May 2002 12:33:10 +0100 > James Shuttleworth <ja...@di...> wrote: > > JS> Does this mean people are considering *not* putting the source on > JS> the disk? I think not having it is not a good idea. > > ISO (binaries): 200MB > ISO (binaries + source): 500MB > Chances of average Windows user wanting the source: 2000-to-1. > > I think putting the source on the CDs is a terrible idea. I would agree, however it wouldn't hurt to put a link to the relevant website for each application if we can incorporate some sort of README in each of the Applications directory, or if we chose to go the route of an installer program rather than a HTML index as would seem to be the case due to not being able to launch installers from any other browser than IE. Can the project leader make a summary of where we are up to and what are the next landmarks, so we can all start to pull in the right direction. Martin Stevens > > -- > Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ > mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A > jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink > > In a Norwegian cocktail lounge: Ladies are requested not to have > children in the bar. -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-05 18:38:12
|
On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 20:33, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Sat, 4 May 2002 16:22:37 -0400 > Jeremy Hise <jh...@li...> wrote: > > JH> OpenCD Corporate Backend > JH> - Apache > JH> - mySQL > JH> - PHP > JH> - Perl > JH> - etc. > > I have several problems with "professional" versions of TheOpenCD: > > 1) This is the big one. The sort of people who would want to use Apache, mySQL (PostgreSQL is better IMHO anyway, but I won't get in to that as it doesn't have a Win32 version), etc are the kind of people who *already* know where to get them and how to install them. AND these people really _should_ switch to Linux ... - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-05 18:35:06
|
Ok looks good for a start, can you slim that down ? It seems that this project is really starting to get going. Maybe appointing maintainers for different sections of the project would help move things forward to the next level. Areas: Directory Structure Documentation Installation Licenses etc. At least then everybody knows who's working on which section and who to liase with. Have we got the final software list yet ? I'm thinking of writing a script to create the directory structure then automatically download the programs, then create an iso ready for burning This should save us from having to mirror all the software. Any comments on this ? On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 03:25:21PM +0000, Buchan Milne wrote: > At some time (about the time we start working on the selected installer) we will > need to have finalised the directory structure. > > My installs directory contains over 3GB (Ok, I have a few versions of OpenOffice, > Mozilla, Flightgear and a complete cygwin, plus some shareware), and we have a > similar directory on one of our servers at the university (that I sync up with from > time to time), and it would be nice to have a standardised structure that all of us > can use on our own machines while working on opencd. > > My directory looks something like this: > > installs > win32 > Administration > Antivirus > Compression > cvs > Database > Documentation > Drivers > Editors > Games > GIS > Graphics > Dia > Gimp > Groupware > Internet > Browsers > Mozilla > Email > Java > Plugins > web > Multimedia > OpenOffice > install > marketing > dictionaries > Programming > cygwin > DevCPP > freepascal > java > wxWindows > Scientific > Security > Terminal > putty > ssh > XFree86 > UPS > Utilities > VNC > su > Win2000 > Win9x > WinNT > WinXP > linux ..... > > Comments? > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... > _______________________________________________ > Opencd-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencd-devel > -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Toby I. <to...@go...> - 2002-05-05 18:32:23
|
On Sat, 4 May 2002 16:22:37 -0400
Jeremy Hise <jh...@li...> wrote:
JH> OpenCD Corporate Backend
JH> - Apache
JH> - mySQL
JH> - PHP
JH> - Perl
JH> - etc.
I have several problems with "professional" versions of TheOpenCD:
1) This is the big one. The sort of people who would want to use Apache, mySQL (PostgreSQL is better IMHO anyway, but I won't get in to that as it doesn't have a Win32 version), etc are the kind of people who *already* know where to get them and how to install them.
2) It's confusing for the end user.
3) Too much more work.
--
Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A
jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink
From a brochure of a car rental firm in Tokyo: When passenger of foot
heave in sight, tootle the horn. Trumpet him melodiously at first,
but if he still obstacles your passage then tootle him with vigor.
|
|
From: Toby I. <to...@go...> - 2002-05-05 18:29:05
|
On Sat, 04 May 2002 12:33:10 +0100
James Shuttleworth <ja...@di...> wrote:
JS> Does this mean people are considering *not* putting the source on
JS> the disk? I think not having it is not a good idea.
ISO (binaries): 200MB
ISO (binaries + source): 500MB
Chances of average Windows user wanting the source: 2000-to-1.
I think putting the source on the CDs is a terrible idea.
--
Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A
jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink
In a Norwegian cocktail lounge: Ladies are requested not to have
children in the bar.
|
|
From: Buchan M. <bg...@ca...> - 2002-05-05 15:29:07
|
At some time (about the time we start working on the selected installer) we will
need to have finalised the directory structure.
My installs directory contains over 3GB (Ok, I have a few versions of OpenOffice,
Mozilla, Flightgear and a complete cygwin, plus some shareware), and we have a
similar directory on one of our servers at the university (that I sync up with from
time to time), and it would be nice to have a standardised structure that all of us
can use on our own machines while working on opencd.
My directory looks something like this:
installs
win32
Administration
Antivirus
Compression
cvs
Database
Documentation
Drivers
Editors
Games
GIS
Graphics
Dia
Gimp
Groupware
Internet
Browsers
Mozilla
Email
Java
Plugins
web
Multimedia
OpenOffice
install
marketing
dictionaries
Programming
cygwin
DevCPP
freepascal
java
wxWindows
Scientific
Security
Terminal
putty
ssh
XFree86
UPS
Utilities
VNC
su
Win2000
Win9x
WinNT
WinXP
linux .....
Comments?
|
|
From: Imran G. <im...@bi...> - 2002-05-05 13:25:10
|
I've made a CSV file containing most of the Windows packages we could use, including the software's website and file size, the file is available from, http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran/opencd/list.csv (Henrik could you transfer a copy to the FTP server, so we can keep all the related files together) Imran -- http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran |
|
From: Imran G. <im...@bi...> - 2002-05-05 12:32:18
|
On Sat, 4 May 2002, Steve Mallett wrote: > On Saturday 04 May 2002 08:40 pm, Imran Ghory wrote: > > On 4 May 2002, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > > > Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's > > > really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: > > > > > > 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the > > > really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about > > > confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the > > > OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. > > > > > > 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must > > > stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this > > > would allow many more apps to qualify. > > > > I've been doing some number crunching and found that their exists about > > 240mb of programs that could go on the CD, excluding most programming type > > software, but including some server software (Apache, MySQL, PHP and > > Perl). So I don't think at this stage we need to break them off into > > seperate CDs just seperate sections. > > I have bad news. PHP isn't actually opensource. GASP! Yes, its true, but a > technicality of one of the minor and ofter ignored clauses of the Open > Source Definition....having you agree to another license other than the one > provided with the program. I believe it is not 'free' either (However, I > understand that it is being changed). PHP 3 was dual licence under the GPL and PHP licence, clearly making it both free and open source. PHP4 switched to the PHP Licence v2 which is copyleft, but with the exclusion of the Zend Engine which is under QPL which the FSF regard as non-free but the OSI regard as open source. I assume the problem is caused by the inclusion of Zend under QPL if seperated from PHP is the problem, but couldn't we solve that problem by including the QPL with the program ? Imran |
|
From: Alan <ap...@co...> - 2002-05-05 06:00:36
|
I forgot to mention: it would be nice if some of you test the gateway too, and give some feedback. The url is http://opensourceware.net/jive . Thanks. Alan < message posted by an user using the Open Source Suppor Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > |
|
From: Alan <ap...@co...> - 2002-05-05 05:51:05
|
If you are receiving this message this means that the Open Source Mailing-list/Usenet Support Gateways are working! I had to test using some real mailing list, so I thought theopencd-devel was the natural choice. The Support Gateways aim to facillitate OpenCD users to get support for their programs.For more info about the Gateways see my post at http://www.opensourceware.net/cgi/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=support;action=display;num=1020564668 Alan < message posted by an user using the Open Source Suppor Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > |
|
From: Jon S. <jsa...@di...> - 2002-05-05 05:16:08
|
Sorry- it didn't upload to the OpenCD site.. just in case I didn't say = it in the last email, here's the link = http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=3D37913 -Jon |
29 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
