Thread: Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

Status: Beta

Brought to you by: kmoore134

pcbsd-developer

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: <ren...@ne...> - 2005-10-15 13:19:39

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  <title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<u>Andrei Kolu wrote:</u><br>
<i><br>
Why rewrite wheel? If we use KDE then all config must be from the same
environment.
</i><i><br>
If we have to maintain jet another DE then we lose so much time that
never release fine desktop operating system.<br>
<br>
</i>I hear the "reinvention of the wheel" all the time and if you think
about it, itsn't really a smart answer. It's a Linux kind of answer.<br>
<br>
Let me point you to a few facts:<br>
<br>
1 - if man hadn't reinvented the wheel time after time, we would be
still eating ants in the bush. Improving of existing technology is waht
has been driving humanity forward.<br>
<br>
I myself build bycicle wheels and i can surely tell the difference
between a properly made wheel and a piece of trash (assuming one is
using the same hub/spokes/rim/nipples)<br>
<br>
Little details can diferentiate the good enough from the exellent.<br>
<br>
2- Making the system DE independent (i am sure this cant be done
overnight) ensures several good things:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;- Everything will still work 100% by default<br>
&nbsp;- DE PBI 's for PC-BSD will be easier to develop and no one will be
asking for x,y or Z version of PC-BSD<br>
&nbsp;- PC-BSD will be future proof
as it is not linked to the story of any particular DE. If KDE gets into
trouble in the future, we will have the ability to steer away from
problems and if anything better comes, we can make the shift faster and
easier.<br>
- We wont have to support any other DE as the pbi maker will have all
the necessary things to build the DE PBI. If someone says: "Ah, but i'd
like to have Gnome" we just say "sure, grab the pbi. It works just the
same way. every tool is there"<i><br>
<br>
</i>Have you compared a F1 car wheel with a regular wheel? It works
better, faster, lighter.<br>
<br>
This is surely one of those things you do overnight but it has to be
done before it is too late to turn back.<br>
<br>
<br>
Second issue:<br>
<i><br>
Please no crappy emulation...
<br>
</i><br>
I ment compatibility layer. In some places it is referred as
compatibility layer, in some other it is emulation layer... Sorry for
the confusion.<br>
<br>
<br>
Third Issue:<br>
<br>
<br>
<i>"<span class="moz-txt-underscore">PC-BSD default tools<span
 class="moz-txt-tag">"</span></span></i><br>
<br>
I think most of it is better leave for 2.0 version of PC-BSD.
<br>
<i><br>
<br>
</i>The Internetworking Manager, the permission manager and the ports
gui should be here before 1.0 The rest can be added after. as i said,
some things are not to be applied immediately.<i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i>
</body>
</html>

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: Andrei K. <an...@bs...> - 2005-10-15 14:51:05

Renato Pinto Fl=F3rido wrote:

> _Andrei Kolu wrote:_
> /
> Why rewrite wheel? If we use KDE then all config must be from the same=20
> environment. //
> If we have to maintain jet another DE then we lose so much time that=20
> never release fine desktop operating system.
>
> /I hear the "reinvention of the wheel" all the time and if you think=20
> about it, itsn't really a smart answer. It's a Linux kind of answer.
>
> Let me point you to a few facts:
>
> 1 - if man hadn't reinvented the wheel time after time, we would be=20
> still eating ants in the bush. Improving of existing technology is=20
> waht has been driving humanity forward.
>
> I myself build bycicle wheels and i can surely tell the difference=20
> between a properly made wheel and a piece of trash (assuming one is=20
> using the same hub/spokes/rim/nipples)
>
> Little details can diferentiate the good enough from the exellent.

This is exactly the "Linux way" to answer. :) I know that "wheel" is=20
reinvented in linux about 125 times right now...maybe more...

WHY REWRITE TOOL THAT JUST WORKS!!!???? dziis...

>
> 2- Making the system DE independent (i am sure this cant be done=20
> overnight) ensures several good things:
>
>  - Everything will still work 100% by default
>  - DE PBI 's for PC-BSD will be easier to develop and no one will be=20
> asking for x,y or Z version of PC-BSD
>  - PC-BSD will be future proof as it is not linked to the story of any=20
> particular DE. If KDE gets into trouble in the future, we will have=20
> the ability to steer away from problems and if anything better comes,=20
> we can make the shift faster and easier.
> - We wont have to support any other DE as the pbi maker will have all=20
> the necessary things to build the DE PBI. If someone says: "Ah, but=20
> i'd like to have Gnome" we just say "sure, grab the pbi. It works just=20
> the same way. every tool is there"/
>
> /Have you compared a F1 car wheel with a regular wheel? It works=20
> better, faster, lighter.
>
If KDE =3D=3D F1 then GNOME =3D=3D Ford to me...

> This is surely one of those things you do overnight but it has to be=20
> done before it is too late to turn back.
>
>
> Second issue:
> /
> Please no crappy emulation...
> /
> I ment compatibility layer. In some places it is referred as=20
> compatibility layer, in some other it is emulation layer... Sorry for=20
> the confusion.
>
I'd like to have native FreeBSD programs not some RedH=E4t 8.0=20
compatibility layered...piece of ...

>
> Third Issue:
>
>
> /"PC-BSD default tools"/
>
> I think most of it is better leave for 2.0 version of PC-BSD.
> /
>
> /The Internetworking Manager, the permission manager and the ports gui=20
> should be here before 1.0 The rest can be added after. as i said, some=20
> things are not to be applied immediately./
> //
> /

Okei this is getting too political right now :))))

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: <ren...@gm...> - 2005-10-15 15:57:33

Andrei Kolu wrote:

> Renato Pinto Flórido wrote:
>
>> _Andrei Kolu wrote:_
>> /
>> Why rewrite wheel? If we use KDE then all config must be from the 
>> same environment. //
>> If we have to maintain jet another DE then we lose so much time that 
>> never release fine desktop operating system.
>>
>> /I hear the "reinvention of the wheel" all the time and if you think 
>> about it, itsn't really a smart answer. It's a Linux kind of answer.
>>
>> Let me point you to a few facts:
>>
>> 1 - if man hadn't reinvented the wheel time after time, we would be 
>> still eating ants in the bush. Improving of existing technology is 
>> waht has been driving humanity forward.
>>
>> I myself build bycicle wheels and i can surely tell the difference 
>> between a properly made wheel and a piece of trash (assuming one is 
>> using the same hub/spokes/rim/nipples)
>>
>> Little details can diferentiate the good enough from the exellent.
>
>
> This is exactly the "Linux way" to answer. :) I know that "wheel" is 
> reinvented in linux about 125 times right now...maybe more...
>
> WHY REWRITE TOOL THAT JUST WORKS!!!???? dziis...
>
>>
>> 2- Making the system DE independent (i am sure this cant be done 
>> overnight) ensures several good things:
>>
>>  - Everything will still work 100% by default
>>  - DE PBI 's for PC-BSD will be easier to develop and no one will be 
>> asking for x,y or Z version of PC-BSD
>>  - PC-BSD will be future proof as it is not linked to the story of 
>> any particular DE. If KDE gets into trouble in the future, we will 
>> have the ability to steer away from problems and if anything better 
>> comes, we can make the shift faster and easier.
>> - We wont have to support any other DE as the pbi maker will have all 
>> the necessary things to build the DE PBI. If someone says: "Ah, but 
>> i'd like to have Gnome" we just say "sure, grab the pbi. It works 
>> just the same way. every tool is there"/
>>
>> /Have you compared a F1 car wheel with a regular wheel? It works 
>> better, faster, lighter.
>>
> If KDE == F1 then GNOME == Ford to me...
>
>> This is surely one of those things you do overnight but it has to be 
>> done before it is too late to turn back.
>>
>>
>> Second issue:
>> /
>> Please no crappy emulation...
>> /
>> I ment compatibility layer. In some places it is referred as 
>> compatibility layer, in some other it is emulation layer... Sorry for 
>> the confusion.
>>
> I'd like to have native FreeBSD programs not some RedHät 8.0 
> compatibility layered...piece of ...
>
>>
>> Third Issue:
>>
>>
>> /"PC-BSD default tools"/
>>
>> I think most of it is better leave for 2.0 version of PC-BSD.
>> /
>>
>> /The Internetworking Manager, the permission manager and the ports 
>> gui should be here before 1.0 The rest can be added after. as i said, 
>> some things are not to be applied immediately./
>> //
>> /
>
>
> Okei this is getting too political right now :))))
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> PCBSD-Developer mailing list
> PCB...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcbsd-developer
>

well, politic is about discussion. at lest it should be.

you didn't understand my point. It's not about changing from one DE to 
another, it's about not being tied to a DE.

Linux distros are not even reinventing the wheel, they are discussing 
only about each color the whell should have :-D

In this case, reinventing (or advancing) is tying the PC-BSD tools to 
PC-BSD, not doing it to the DE. If you look carefully, each time a Linux 
OS chooses a DE and needs special tools (or different tools) they start 
making DE tools. That is different from having the tools DE independent 
(can be used with what DE one wishes)which and are developed for the OS 
and work no matter what color you paint it.

About The InterNetworking Manager, the permission manager and the ports 
gui, it really makes no sense releasing a "desktop" which hasn't got 
these basic features if there is a very similar project (DesktopBSD) 
which is supposed to aim at a more "educated" user with a better 
knowlege of BSD and ships with them.

If 1% of the politics were like us we would be in a better world :)))

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: Andrei K. <an...@bs...> - 2005-10-15 16:15:19

Renato Fl=F3rido wrote:

> well, politic is about discussion. at lest it should be.
>
> you didn't understand my point. It's not about changing from one DE to=20
> another, it's about not being tied to a DE.
>
> Linux distros are not even reinventing the wheel, they are discussing=20
> only about each color the whell should have :-D

As I said earlier : let's stick with default KDE environment and make it=20
work properly- only then we can change color and other unimportant things.

> In this case, reinventing (or advancing) is tying the PC-BSD tools to=20
> PC-BSD, not doing it to the DE. If you look carefully, each time a=20
> Linux OS chooses a DE and needs special tools (or different tools)=20
> they start making DE tools. That is different from having the tools DE=20
> independent (can be used with what DE one wishes)which and are=20
> developed for the OS and work no matter what color you paint it.

There is no such thing like Linux OS! Linux even don't have userland=20
like FreeBSD...
Who want change DE? PC-BSD tools is separated from default KDE binaries-=20
there is no need to write another version...

> About The InterNetworking Manager, the permission manager and the=20
> ports gui, it really makes no sense releasing a "desktop" which hasn't=20
> got these basic features if there is a very similar project=20
> (DesktopBSD) which is supposed to aim at a more "educated" user with a=20
> better knowlege of BSD and ships with them.
>
so why not use DesktopBSD Networking Manager- why write our own????=20
Let's cooperate!

> If 1% of the politics were like us we would be in a better world :)))
>

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: Andrew Y. <yo...@de...> - 2005-10-15 16:24:28

Well I've been talking to Kris, and Kris acknowledges that I'm =20
working on a GNOME release of PC-BSD, I have successfully built GNOME =20=

and I'm working on refining the system.

PC-BSD tools do require a few components of the KDE3LIBS so are in =20
fact not DE independent, this is why the GNOME release I'm working on =20=

will also include:

- KDE3BASE
- KDE3LIBS
- QT3


On 15 Oct 2005, at 17:17, Andrei Kolu wrote:

> Renato Fl=F3rido wrote:
>
>
>> well, politic is about discussion. at lest it should be.
>>
>> you didn't understand my point. It's not about changing from one =20
>> DE to another, it's about not being tied to a DE.
>>
>> Linux distros are not even reinventing the wheel, they are =20
>> discussing only about each color the whell should have :-D
>>
>
> As I said earlier : let's stick with default KDE environment and =20
> make it work properly- only then we can change color and other =20
> unimportant things.
>
>
>> In this case, reinventing (or advancing) is tying the PC-BSD tools =20=

>> to PC-BSD, not doing it to the DE. If you look carefully, each =20
>> time a Linux OS chooses a DE and needs special tools (or different =20=

>> tools) they start making DE tools. That is different from having =20
>> the tools DE independent (can be used with what DE one wishes)=20
>> which and are developed for the OS and work no matter what color =20
>> you paint it.
>>
>
> There is no such thing like Linux OS! Linux even don't have =20
> userland like FreeBSD...
> Who want change DE? PC-BSD tools is separated from default KDE =20
> binaries- there is no need to write another version...
>
>
>> About The InterNetworking Manager, the permission manager and the =20
>> ports gui, it really makes no sense releasing a "desktop" which =20
>> hasn't got these basic features if there is a very similar project =20=

>> (DesktopBSD) which is supposed to aim at a more "educated" user =20
>> with a better knowlege of BSD and ships with them.
>>
>>
> so why not use DesktopBSD Networking Manager- why write our own???? =20=

> Let's cooperate!
>
>
>> If 1% of the politics were like us we would be in a better world :)))
>>
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, =20
> discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> PCBSD-Developer mailing list
> PCB...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcbsd-developer
>
>
>

Re: [Re: [Pcbsd-developer] Asked for a Todo list?]

From: Andrei K. <an...@bs...> - 2005-10-15 16:33:56

Tim McCormick wrote:

> Andrei Kolu wrote:
>
>> so why not use DesktopBSD Networking Manager- why write our own???? 
>> Let's cooperate!
>
>
> Ah, there are certain issues with this that we've looked at already. 
> The  only real problem in the way is that all the DesktopBSD tools 
> come with a rather large handful of dependencies. It is such that if 
> we wanted to use, for example, their Network manager we'd have to also 
> import a huge number of their specific libraries onto our base system. 
> I don't think we really want to do that.

So you want to use your own huge number of libraries???

I hoped that we don't fell in that trashcan like Linux distros by 
writing hundreds of tools for ONE task...

[Pcbsd-developer] Re: Asked for a Todo list?

From: Federico L. <flo...@gm...> - 2005-10-15 17:29:54

Precicly, most Linux Distros ship with 1000 different editors, when
all the user wants is a simple notepad app.

On 10/15/05, Andrei Kolu <an...@bs...> wrote:
> Tim McCormick wrote:
>
> > Andrei Kolu wrote:
> >
> >> so why not use DesktopBSD Networking Manager- why write our own????
> >> Let's cooperate!
> >
> >
> > Ah, there are certain issues with this that we've looked at already.
> > The  only real problem in the way is that all the DesktopBSD tools
> > come with a rather large handful of dependencies. It is such that if
> > we wanted to use, for example, their Network manager we'd have to also
> > import a huge number of their specific libraries onto our base system.
> > I don't think we really want to do that.
>
> So you want to use your own huge number of libraries???
>
> I hoped that we don't fell in that trashcan like Linux distros by
> writing hundreds of tools for ONE task...
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> PCBSD-Developer mailing list
> PCB...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcbsd-developer
>