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

  • From: Nathan Kelley <phyax@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: OpenBeOS Discussion <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 22:17:35 +1000

To OpenBeOS Discussion <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> subscribers,

From: Michael Phipps <mphipps1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
From: Paolo Pisati <flaggaccio@xxxxxxxxx>,

I agree with you, that there has to be one way to do many of these things. One set of standard paths. One naming convention. Etc. This is one of the reasons that BeUnited.org became a standards group. Because this isn't just about OBOS (although we are the coolest! :-)). Because there is Blue and Cosmoe and Leonardo and so on.

What?

I hope I misunderstood your words but, it looks like the OpenBeOS guys are going to accept the rules dictated (cause a standard is a rule IMHO) from third-party company/organization...

BeUnited.org is not a dictatorship. Members of OpenBeOS, BlueEyedOS, Cosmoe and Leonardo projects all need to agree on any proposed standards. The goal is to make cross-BeOS-platform development easy by making sure developers have a good target to aim for. It's not to stamp out the individualism of the projects.

so, try to figure out this...

BlueOS, MickeysMouseOS and SnoopyOS decide to move all startup scripts to a completely different system (think something like SystemV vs BSD), and BeUnited accepts these changes: now what should we do?

Change our system cause others changed their mind?

If BeUnited accepted the changes, then we can assume the OpenBeOS people didn't object. And if all the four projects think it's a good idea, and think it should be standard, then why wouldn't we want to participate?

The people on OpenBeOS are, from what I've seen, clever and resourceful and full of good ideas. But keep in mind other projects have clever, resourceful people full of good ideas as well. Is it wise to reject good ideas simply because someone else had them first?

Personally, I don't really care about the others, i mean our aim is to develop the new BeOS, isn't it? And how can we innovate if someone has already the ability to change our destiny?

These other projects could, and possibly have, said the same thing too, and yet they've come on board BeUnited's boat. Yes, we're here to develop & extend BeOS, and we're going to do just that. BeUnited is a standards body; they can't -force- any of these projects to do it their way, and I'm hoping it won't come to that because BeUnited is meant to be a co-operative, not adversarial, system.

And if BlueOS, whateverOS and PopeOS insert new kits in their system what should we do? Write our own kit following the example of the others, cause BeUnited told us it has to be?!?!?

Once more: BeUnited is not a dictatorship. These other projects are free to include all kinds of custom bits & pieces, as are we.

This is simply ridiculous, i mean, we are OpenBeOS (or at least who writes code is OpenBeOS..) and this idea of standards dictated from someone else simply sucks...i'm sorry...

W3C dots the i's and crosses the t's on their standards, like HTML, but apparently that doesn't suck. You could say they dictate from afar, and people love them for it. BeUnited is nothing like this.

In the BSD world, the FreeBSD guys have their own idea and IF someone else is already working on something similar they will adopt that system, but they don't accept any order from anyone (organization, company, religion, or whatever...) they decide on their own...

Why do you believe that OpenBeOS or these other projects will be different? I'm sure there'll be plenty of code sharing, from which will emerge de facto standards for things, which will then likely be ratified through BeUnited RFC process into BeUnited standards. If all four projects ratify, then developers know they can rely on said environment to be available for them to use; in short, we get the advantages afforded by a standard environment, such as with Windows, but with plenty of options, such as with Linux distros. BeOS distributions sitting in the middle there stand to get a lot. So far, the only platform in the middle is Darwin/MacOS X, and even Apple is seeing benefits with their proprietary hardware configurations, just by having that system...

Cheers, Nathan.
________________________________________________
Nathan "Phyax" Kelley

   email | phyax@xxxxxxxxxx, phyax@xxxxxxx
     icq | 4618849
   yahoo | phyax
________________________________________________


Other related posts:

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