[openbeos] Re: Suggestion (was Re: A bit of prep talk)
- From: Teh Kelvin-CKT044 <Kelvin.Teh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 09:15:30 +0800
Hmm...... this reminds me of a previous post where there was a concern
regarding the use of the words "BeOS" in the proposed new open-source OS
being developed here. Since it seems to have been more or less settled that
a huge portion of the kernel is going to be based on the NewOS kernel, it
occured to me that it might be a good idea to simply call our new OS NewOS
(provided Travis agrees, of course). The name itself, IMHO, seems to reflect
the spirit of this initiative (and, one might argue, Be's original aim of
doing away with legacy codes). I know this may appear to be a rather
controversial move, especially since we have gotten so used to the "BeOS"
name, but I think it would be in our best interests to use a name that will
not antagonize either Palm or Be Inc. (they might not take too well to an OS
whose name consists of their trademark, prefixed by the word "Open"). It
would seem to be a better approach to settle on a name and stick with it to
the end rather than have to change it sometime later in the future.
I have visited the NewOS website sometime around last week at
http://newos.sourceforge.net and found that the site is already relatively
complete. There are already three mailing lists set up (which is not being
fully utilized yet, at present) that we might be able to use, rather than
setting up more mailing lists elsewhere. At times like this, IMHO, it is
very important for us to stick together and not go about creating too many
separate projects, as far as possible. I cannot say how receptive Travis or
you guys will be to this suggestion, but it is just a thought that might be
able to avoid the stress and inconvenience that might possibly occur in the
future if, for example, Palm or Be were to suddenly decide to send us a
"friendly" letter asking us to change the name of this OS. I am aware that
some of you have already set up websites with the "openbeos" name (e.g.
open-beos.sourceforge.net and the Open BeOS Developer's Network website),
and that, I think is a very good thing. I am just concerned that if we were
to change the name later, it would be much more inconvenient than to change
the name now (especially since Be Inc. doesn't seem to encourage open-source
initiatives of BeOS by taking up most of the openbeos-related domain names).
Anyhow, this is just a thought, and there might be good reasons why
all this might not be a good idea that I have failed to consider. Whether
this is adopted or not is up to the OpenBeOS developer's community. What do
you guys think of the idea?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bsa [SMTP:bsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:55 PM
> To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [openbeos] Re: A bit of prep talk
>
>
>
> > people are examining NewOS/AtheOS/BeOS and teams are forming up. Thats
> > great!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We're not loosing focus, and I'm glad to see that
> we're
> > agreeing that most of our attention is on the 2 major components (kernel
> and
> > app_kit/interface kit).
>
> I think (if i wrong, please correct me) - OpenBeOS is a little error.
> Recreation of system is not necessary.
> OpenBeOS will not become BeOS with open source. Our old BeOS slowly moves
> to
> graveyard.
> But NewOS is raising, and we can help its developer - we really can create
> new object-oriented opensource
> operating system. Kernel is about ready. It is main.
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
