osfree.org

#785 Re: Update or Move Site Of OSFree?
Expand Messages

Tom Lee Mullins
2003 Sep 4, 2003
--- In osFree@yahoogroups.com, yuri_prokushev@m... wrote:

> * Answer on message from INET.OSFREE area
>
> Hello!
>
> Answer on message from Tom Lee Mullins to osFree@yahoogroups.com:
>
> >The OSFree site of http://www.osfree.org has not been updated
> >in quite awhile. Will it be updated? Could it be moved to or have
> >another site created at http://sourceforge.net and/or
> >http://www.netlabs.org ? (ie; http://osfree.sourceforge.net and/
> >or http://osfree.netlabs.org ?).
> Who will di it?
>
> CU!
>
> Yuri Prokushev
> prokushev at freemail dot ru [http://sibyl.netlabs.org]

I guess any person could start it (the new site) and give access
to those who wish to program/develope it [in the areas that need
it]). IIRC - with Sourceforge.net, I guess one could start the
site/project/page and give access to anyone who wants to be part
of it.

BigWarpGuy

#786 From: "Andrew Belov" <andrew_belov@...>
Date: Thu Sep 4, 2003 7:39 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Update or Move Site Of OSFree? a_belov2001
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:37:55 -0000, Tom Lee Mullins wrote:

>> >The OSFree site of http://www.osfree.org has not been updated
>> >in quite awhile. Will it be updated? Could it be moved to or have
>> >another site created at http://sourceforge.net and/or
>> >http://www.netlabs.org ? (ie; http://osfree.sourceforge.net and/
>> >or http://osfree.netlabs.org ?).
>> Who will di it?
>I guess any person could start it (the new site) and give access
>to those who wish to program/develope it [in the areas that need
>it]). IIRC - with Sourceforge.net, I guess one could start the
>site/project/page and give access to anyone who wants to be part
>of it.

Apart from my assumption that nobody will start this project for the
third time, I'd like to point out that SourceForge was already
considered as a location for the open-source part of osFree (i.e., its
second incarnation). This option was discarded in favor of an
independent CVS server, particularly because of complexities imposed by
the SSH-only access to SF CVS, as well as extra overhead in
administering the project.

Netlabs would be a much better choice but first there should be some
indication of continued developers' interest in the project. There is
none as I can tell, and personally I'm happy with the "first" (TPE)
edition banned from elsewhere.

#787 From: "Lynn H. Maxson" <lmaxson@...>
Date: Thu Sep 4, 2003 7:57 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Update or Move Site Of OSFree? lynnmaxson
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


I would agree that Netlabs seems a better choice. On the
other hand we already have another independent group
formed for the third incarnation, if I read the messages
correctly on this mailing list. It would seem to want a more
"controlled" environment, engaging only those "serious" about
participating. Just a bit too serious for me.

I haven't investigated what it would require to set up under
Netlabs, but I would participate in any documentation effort.

#788 From: yuri_prokushev@mail.ru
Date: Thu Sep 4, 2003 7:22 pm
Subject: Re: Update or Move Site Of OSFree? prokushev
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email


* Answer on message from INET.OSFREE area

Hello!

Answer on message from Andrew Belov to osFree@yahoogroups.com:

>>>> The OSFree site of http://www.osfree.org has not been updated
>>>> in quite awhile. Will it be updated? Could it be moved to or have
>>>> another site created at http://sourceforge.net and/or
>>>> http://www.netlabs.org ? (ie; http://osfree.sourceforge.net and/
>>>> or http://osfree.netlabs.org ?).
>>> Who will di it?
>> I guess any person could start it (the new site) and give access
>> to those who wish to program/develope it [in the areas that need
>> it]). IIRC - with Sourceforge.net, I guess one could start the
>> site/project/page and give access to anyone who wants to be part
>> of it.

AB> Apart from my assumption that nobody will start this project for
AB> the
AB> third time, I'd like to point out that SourceForge was already
AB> considered as a location for the open-source part of osFree (i.e.,
AB> its
AB> second incarnation). This option was discarded in favor of an
AB> independent CVS server, particularly because of complexities
AB> imposed
AB> by
AB> the SSH-only access to SF CVS, as well as extra overhead in
AB> administering the project.

AB> Netlabs would be a much better choice but first there should be
AB> some
AB> indication of continued developers' interest in the project. There
AB> is
AB> none as I can tell, and personally I'm happy with the "first" (TPE)
AB>
AB> edition banned from elsewhere.
Ok. I also prefer netlabs.org. Anyway, osfree.sourceforge.net already
registered (by me), so, if anyone interested to have project at
sourceforge.net, then can be used.

Currently I have latest CVS copy of osFree + plus some additions and
restructurisations. 4OS2 sources added as CMD and all messages from
4os2h.msg moved to oso001.msg. Added compilation of msg files (with nls
support). Added sources of regina rexx (not integrated yet). Added some
utils. Also I propose to use 4os2 help file as starting point of cmdref.
As compiler used OpenWatcom 1.0 (not tested with latest 1.1) instead
of Watcom 11c.

So, only needed is CVS server. Adrian? You comments?

CU!

Yuri Prokushev
prokushev at freemail dot ru [http://sibyl.netlabs.org]

#789 From: "Tom Lee Mullins" <tomleem@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 2:30 am
Subject: OSFree and eCS/Serenity Systems? bigwarpguy
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


I posted a suggestion at the forum at
http;//www.ecomstation.com of Serenity Systems
getting involved with OSFree (they could be to
OSFree what RedHat [which sells a version of
Linux] is to Linux]). If they do get involved,
they could host the site (like Scitech Software
[ http://www.scitechsoft.com ] hosts Open Watcom
[ http://www.openwatcom.org ]?

BigWarpGuy

#790 From: Kenn Yuill <kenn.yuill@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 3:31 am
Subject: New Asian OS? kenn.yuill@...
Send Email Send Email


Here is an interesting news item from the Computer Business Review at

http://www.cbronline.com/todaysnews/f07 ... 960018c2be

The article is lacking details, but is brief so here it is. Anyone with
Japanese computing contacts should make sure that they are aware of
Warpstock and Lynn's proposals of course, .
---------
Japan Proposes Windows Alternative

Microsoft Corp could face a new operating system rival in China and Asia
Pacific, sponsored by at least three of the region's governments.

Japanese government officials will this week propose development of an
operating system so local economies will be less dependent on Windows,
according to reports. Government and private sector companies in Japan,
South Korea and China will jointly work together on the operating
system, to be announced at the Association of South East Asian Nations
meeting in Phnom Penh.

Japan is reported to have already initiated private sector studies in
the hopes of developing an operating system for servers and
internet-enabled appliances while China's officials promoted Red Flag
Linux.

--
Ciao,
Kenn
________________________________________________________

Always act as if life is a joyous journey. - K.A. Yuill
Warp4 FP15 - Communicator 4.61
-oOo-
_____ Quotation for Today _____

Computers are like Old Testament gods;
lots of rules and no mercy.
- Joseph Campbell
________________________________________________________

#791 From: "Lynn H. Maxson" <lmaxson@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 4:41 am
Subject: Re: New Asian OS? lynnmaxson
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Kenn Yuill writes:
"...The article is lacking details, but is brief so here it is.
Anyone with Japanese computing contacts should make sure
that they are aware of Warpstock and Lynn's proposals of
course, . ..."

Well, with one of the three, China, already pushing Red Hat
Lunux we have the opportunity to see, one, the route at
which they arrive at a consensus (if at all), and, two, where
in the continuum from kernel to full package they make their
cut. As stated the article was very brief. You do get the
feeling that this is something that has been bubbling under the
surface for some time. The facts that the main
proponents--South Korea, China, and Japan--are global
competitors and that collusion exists between private and
government sectors in all of them indicates that they have
come to basic agreement.

However, they have to usurp Windows. That means they
have to run Window applications. I doubt basically they will
attempt either Lindows, WINE, or ODIN. I would imagine that
something like REACTOS, an NT replacement, would be the
direction they would take.

Will they take it open source? We're talking real bucks here,
private money, government money. Neither has shown much
inclination about giving it away without getting something in
return. I doubt seriously that they will turn the academics
loose to churn up the esoterics, given the burn the Japanese
received in the perception of their fifth generation effort.

In best case they will select a uK option, offer an open
competition award for the first three finishers of an
agreed-upon design of a Windows personality. I say best case
as that offers us an opportunity to implement an OS/2
personality with, hopefully, the Linux people not far behind.

Now my speculations are no better than that. For the reasons
I have covered here recently opting for less than a full
package replacement makes little sense. I would think they
would incorporate an Office replacement as part of the
package. After all is is Office that gives M$ its dominance.
Windows itself is no more than a catalyst. Just changing the
catalyst does not free you from M$, if that remains your goal.

I'm just guessing but I would think they would select
something like StarOffice to sink their money in to get an
Office replacement in the least time for the least cost. In so
doing it probably opens up to us our best chance of having an
uptodate Office replacement as an OS/2 app.

As this plays out we need to track their schedule, their
organization, their openness relative to project management
to see at what point we can turn this to our advantage.
We're probably looking at 2 to 5 years here with public
milestones. Those will indicate when with least effort we can
achieve maximum results.

I appreciate the comments regarding my proposals along with
the sly smile. I would doubt with the amount of funding they
have to come up with they will bet their bucks on "untried"
and as yet "unwritten" software tools. We'll see how much
attention they pay to the "tunes" or Maude projects. You see
money dulls the senses.<g>

However, at the end of the day we can only achieve our
independence based on our own resources. The Asian trio has
the money to buy their independence. They probably have
the patience as well. That makes them two up on us.<g>

Without arguing my proposals which deal with software tools
to increase programmer productivity we can probably best
spend our time in analysis and design, crossing our t's and
dotting our i's. The better we know what we want or even
what we can have the easier we can make the mapping from
one to the other.

It begins with documentation. Do we want to include it as a
Netlabs project?

#792 From: "Andrew Belov" <andrew_belov@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 1:48 pm
Subject: Re: OSFree and eCS/Serenity Systems? a_belov2001
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:30:30 -0000, Tom Lee Mullins wrote:

>I posted a suggestion at the forum at
>http;//www.ecomstation.com of Serenity Systems
>getting involved with OSFree (they could be to
>OSFree what RedHat [which sells a version of
>Linux] is to Linux]). If they do get involved,
>they could host the site (like Scitech Software
>[ http://www.scitechsoft.com ] hosts Open Watcom
>[ http://www.openwatcom.org ]?

I fear SSI will not support this development after the fiasco of the
first edition of osFree. SSI representatives were among its strongest
opponents (see the archives of this group).

#793 From: "Tom Lee Mullins" <tomleem@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: OSFree and eCS/Serenity Systems? bigwarpguy
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


--- In osFree@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Belov" <andrew_belov@n...> wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:30:30 -0000, Tom Lee Mullins wrote:
>
> >I posted a suggestion at the forum at
> >http;//www.ecomstation.com of Serenity Systems
> >getting involved with OSFree (they could be to
> >OSFree what RedHat [which sells a version of
> >Linux] is to Linux]). If they do get involved,
> >they could host the site (like Scitech Software
> >[ http://www.scitechsoft.com ] hosts Open Watcom
> >[ http://www.openwatcom.org ]?
>
> I fear SSI will not support this development after the fiasco of the
> first edition of osFree. SSI representatives were among its strongest
> opponents (see the archives of this group).

Perhaps they saw it as 'loss of potential revenue'? Perhaps if they
could see it as a way to make money they would have more interest in
it? Linux is a free operating system and open source but Red Hat
(and others like it) make money off it (by selling extras, features
like support and it being on a cd, etc)? Perhaps if one could appeal
to how they could profit from supporting OSFree that they might
have a change of mind? (just a thought).

BigWarpGuy

#794 From: "Andrew Belov" <andrew_belov@...>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 5:07 pm
Subject: Re: Re: OSFree and eCS/Serenity Systems? a_belov2001
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 12:18:23 -0000, Tom Lee Mullins wrote:

>> I fear SSI will not support this development after the fiasco of the
>> first edition of osFree. SSI representatives were among its strongest
>> opponents (see the archives of this group).
>
>Perhaps they saw it as 'loss of potential revenue'?

No, the reasons were stated clearly as the refusal to deal with that
kind of "grey area" project. Check the archives from Feb'2002. If you
are new to this group and need a brief history of osFree, I can outline
it here.

>Perhaps if they could see it as a way to make money they would
>have more interest in it?

Unlikely. SSI comprises about 1/50th of RedHat's resources. A company
like that can't justify the expenditures of any part of this venture.

>Linux is a free operating system and open source but Red Hat
>(and others like it) make money off it (by selling extras, features
>like support and it being on a cd, etc)? Perhaps if one could appeal
>to how they could profit from supporting OSFree that they might
>have a change of mind? (just a thought).

Very unlikely, as there is no code that can be readily "supported" so
far, therefore I advise to not waste time on solving organizational
issues (there's FreeOS for that), and rather use the osFree group to
comment on any developments directly related to the OS/2 redesign.