[openbeos] Re: BeUnited, the standardization group: unacceptable!!!

  • From: Andrew Edward McCall <mccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 19:25:06 +0000

On Tuesday 02 July 2002 18:00, you wrote:
> Excuse me for butting in after lurking for about 6 months...
>
> Andrew, buy a clue,

Can you please keep the discussion friendly. Smart pokes like this are what 
makes a mailing list degenerate into a childish frenzy.

> Standards are what make the difference between consistancy and the morass
> of disparate looking applications you get when you run X-Windows with it's
> 30+ GUI toolkits and widget sets.  Or the differing driver models for each
> variation of the X Servers (Xfree is just one implementation of the X
> protocol).

The fact is though, our standards are going down the exactly the same path as 
X and its many toolkits.

We won't be using the same toolkit as Cosmoe, Leonardo or BlueEyedOS, thus are 
apps *will* look slightly different. Fact.

Its almost 100% that our drivers won't work with them either. (We will be 
lucky if we get ours to work with BeOS).

> I'm sorry that you've evidently never looked beyond your own self interest

Why is this in *my* self interest? What do I have to gain?

To be honest, I am thinking in best interest of the BeOS community that I have 
been a part of for the last 6 years.

> to see that the world at large needs a certain amount of standardization in
> order to interoperate.  In terms of BU vs. OBOS, BU made an effort to
> retain the original Be, Inc, codebase and product.  As such, they could not
> commit to OBOS until that option was ruled out.  Of course using any
> business logic would fly in the face of the 'MineIsBetter' bacteria that
> appears to have infected so many otherwise rational humans when it comes to
> decision making. It's as if the fact that the BU has always sought to
> 'guide' the future of the BeOS down a path of both commercial and technical

But why? What has OBOS it got to do with them?

I am not suggesting that we kill off OBOS, BU, BlueEyedOS or anthing like 
that. I am suggesting that instead of all this effort to create standards for 
us all adhear to, why don't we spend more effort teaming up creating BeOS.

All these forks are simply not helping anyone. I think it would make more se

> excellence is of no relevance to you.  God forbid that someone try to bring
> rational,
> comprehensive goals and standards to your beloved project.  Much less that
> they use it as a vehicle to generate revenue to ultimately employ and
> *gasp* actually pay some of the gifted and dedicated hackers that OBOS has
> working on the project.  Of course these kinds of rational decisions and
> suggestions have absolutely no place in closet that theses infected minds
> become.  After all, as a hacker, we wouldn't ever want some kind of
> guidance that provides us with a clearly defined finish line for a project.

That is exactly what I am aiming for.

I want OBOS.org to cover these standards.

There are 100's of people listed on the web site, and only a handfull 
commiting code - why don't the others start RFC's for standards on a seperate 
mailing list??

Anyway, can please kill this thread before it degenerates any futher.

> Andy

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2002