Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"  (Read 28639 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #44 on: February 16, 2020, 05:28:46 PM »
Okay, let me clarify: You don't like having your little babies open sourced.
Did you look at my github page? There is open source there. If you look in Aminet (hey!), you'll find sources of MuFastRom, and some other of those tools. In source form. There is, erally, open source, though for a different, more disciplined community.

You were against open sourcing P96 - which would have been a tremendously good thing for the Amiga - now you're maintaining it. You are against open sourcing AmigaOS - and you 're the one developing it. I can see a pattern here.
Huh, what? I'm not developing it. I don't know who is, all I'm doing is that whenever I see a bug, I fix it, but that's hardly development. If you want to know who develops it, ask Jens. If you want to contribute, ask Jens. He's probably looking for someone to drive his product because I cannot.

What does any of this have to do with AmigaOS?
A *lot*, because that is exactly what makes the difference. We do not have a critical mass of developers, we do not have sufficient numbers of commercial players.

Current situation: Your team develops AmigaOS 3.2. Releases it. Doesn't get paid. Then works on 3.3.
Other than that, there will be only superficial differences between both scenarios, like Cosmos starting a flame war telling people how much your coding skills suck and releasing CosmOS 3.2, and everybody laughing about him.

You're just trying to distract from the simple truth that in reality, nothing much would change by open sourcing AmigaOS.
A lot would change, and I'm really stunned that you don't see that. We would not have one version of AmigaOs, but multiple. It would be hard to develop any software for anything beyond 3.1 because there wouldn't be a stable ground for it. "Works with library Y, but only from distribution A, not B". It would be hard to get hardware developped for it - "needs ROM from X, not from Y". I'm really stunned that you don't see the difference between "here is the documentation, here is how it works" and "oh well, here is a bunch of software, make your pick, and if it doesn't work, well, wrong combination, but not my problem".

We would have a "KollaOs - motto - I know it better anyhow", and "SpeedGeekOs - but my Os is 0.5% faster than yours", and whatever other stuff. Currently, already about 30-40% of development time is wasted in compatibility issues by products that are written in an inable way. We have a couple of workarounds even in 3.1.4 to keep DOpus happy, to keep Kingkong happy, and others. Now, multiply this by the number of distributions to expect, and we're in a situation where Os development becomes blocked by just hunting down such issues.

This kinna works in Linux because there is a sufficient critical mass to handle such problems, but we have a much smaller bunch of developers. To be able to keep development possible, we need to cut *down* the complexity, not increase it. This program was already started with 3.1.4 (only *one* utility.library, only *one* graphics.library). How would that work with "just another exec" from "we don't do autoconf because we know better" or "just another graphics because we know how to save two cycles from an inner loop". Thank you, there are lots of other more important things to do, and I don't want *my* time wasted with a lot of useless dicussions with people that do not know better, despite what they want to make you believe.

Are you seriously mentioning "many desktops would arise" and "we would loose consistent look and feel" to tell us how bad open sourcing AmigaOS would be? Have you actually ever used AmigaOS? Do I need to make a list of available desktops, docks and taskbars for you? Or GUI toolkits and Gadtools/ASL patches?
See above. Now tell me, how is this going to improve with this complexity even on the Os level? How can we handle this complexity? Who can? How to create software on unstable grounds, without development power available to handle the additional complexity?

You forgot to mention that open source AmigaOS  also abuses his wife and beats his children.
Say, do you want to be taken serious or make a fool of yourself?

We've always had quasi branches of AmigaOS or parts of it ever since Commodore went down. People were patching their systems to death, installing (allegedly) faster serial drivers and Workbench replacements or replacing major parts of the system with backports from AROS. Guess what? We survived it. And so did AmigaOS.
For which definition of "survive"? It made the whole game tremendously difficult, as a couple of these "creations" are road-blocks for particular developments. Are you seriously saying that the situation is going to improve by creating more roadblocks?

We would still have rules. You're the only one claiming otherwise.
Which rules? Once it is open source, the ghost is out of the bottle. "Fuck rules" is probably the only rule I would know from this community.

And If I were a developer relying on "the rules" as defined by you, I'd have started to use Reaction as a GUI toolkit when 3.5/3.9 were released. Then I would have switched back to Gadtools (?) when 3.1.4 came out, now I'd have to rewrite my projects again to switch back to Reaction.
Reaction on your system didn't went away, just we couldn't support it for reasons you know precisely. I'm all happy we can continue to support it now. Nobody was expecting you to rewrite a project - quite the opposite, the interfaces should remain as stated.

So how are 3.1.4 and 3.2 developed? Who's making the decisions?
The wrong people. Developers, like me. Surprised? That's exactly why we need a better process. I'm all for opening up the process, just we couldn't do. We do have RFCs, though not as consistent as I would like, though publishing those would be nice, and having a forum for collecting feed back would be helpful, just someone to filter them because it is just too much for us to handle, and to filter out all the trolling. A bug tracker would be helpful, for the public. Most importantly, end user support would be helpful, because we're definitely the wrong people for that. We would also need people with experience in human interface design, which is badly lacking.

But there is a difference between "open source" and "open processes", "developer driven" and "design driven". Prime example in Amiga land "how to get it wrong" is DefIcons (which caused a lot of trouble and discussion inside the development crew, and also because I'm pretty bad at this as well). It is a nice software architecture, a good data structure, a good abstraction of the search process as a tree, so software-wise, Stephan did a good job - and at the same time, the whole way how its preferences look like is over the head of its users, and the prefs are a binary blob that is impossible to handle without an editor, and hard to adapt and unflexible. A UI to handle its preferences is as charming as the Windows registry editor.

I'm not saying that Stephan back then did a bad job, really not, but he started from the wrong end. But it was, as far as the UI is concerned, not the right software. It was developer driven. I created a lot of internal struggle and fighting to get away with this model and get something simpler and easier to handle, where you just drag your default icons into a drawer, and create the rule files, encoded in ASCII, with a simple Wizard program. So it is scalable, and easy to handle. That caused a lot of trouble and misunderstanding, also due to my un-ability to communicate correctly, yet, I believe strongly that the result is much better and much simpler and much easier to handle and to adopt. The software architecture is probably less "nice", but the result is hopefully a lot more accessible.

I'm not so good at all this as I should, but if you look around, there is a reason why Apple became so successful: It is *exactly not* a developer-driven process, but a UI-driven, design-driven process. That is, in a sense, a good example why open source "is good for developers" is a bad way of designing a system that should be usable by the average guys.

So you're saying it would be better for AmigaOS if Ben and Timothy would call the shots instead of you?
I would say that AmigaOs would be better if we had a specialist in UI design (and not a lawer) who would be central in decision making, yes. What we would need is a management that believes in its product (and not its money it may or may not make). Hyperion is a "company" and not a company because of exactly that. A management with a clear vision is missing, and a mechanism to implement its vision and communicating this vision to the developers. That is missing. You do not get this in the open source world - and then you deliver things like "Gnome3" or "cups". Nice software, bad usability.

I would be hoping that by creating a board that makes decisions, with developers having voices, but also management defining a direction would be a good thing. I would be hoping that the board would be transparent in decision making and communication.

You know, there are good reasons why we have a representative democracy, where - ideally at least - elections allow people to chose between various visions, though representatives care about the details how to implement them. It does not mean "everybody has the freedom to do everything" but "make your choice, but trust the decision makers to do the right thing to respect your vote". Well, at least in theory.
 
The following users thanked this post: First Ninja

Offline kolla

Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #45 on: February 16, 2020, 06:03:41 PM »
So you are afraid that open sourcing might attract more developers? *slow clap*
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC
---
A3000/060CSPPC+CVPPC/128MB + 256MB BigRAM/Deneb USB
A4000/CS060/Mediator4000Di/Voodoo5/128MB
A1200/Blz1260/IndyAGA/192MB
A1200/Blz1260/64MB
A1200/Blz1230III/32MB
A1200/ACA1221
A600/V600v2/Subway USB
A600/Apollo630/32MB
A600/A6095
CD32/SX32/32MB/Plipbox
CD32/TF328
A500/V500v2
A500/MTec520
CDTV
MiSTer, MiST, FleaFPGAs and original Minimig
Peg1, SAM440 and Mac minis with MorphOS
 

Offline bison

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Posts: 59
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by bison
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #46 on: February 16, 2020, 06:05:16 PM »
Quote
Linux as operating system is doable because there it runs on off-the-shelve hardware, and it has a critical mass of hardware and software to pick from, and a sufficient number of professional players that are part of the game that drive it.
Linux did not spring into existence in its current form.  Back in 1994 it did not run on off-the-shelf hardware; it was an arduous task trying to get a graphics card to work with X11.  If you wanted additional software beyond what was in the distribution, you compiled it from source, and it didn't have *any* professional support for hardware or software.

Too many open-source projects have started from nothing and succeeded to think that AmigaOS would somehow fail given the same opportunity.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2020, 06:07:45 PM by bison »
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #47 on: February 16, 2020, 06:18:44 PM »
Too many open-source projects have started from nothing and succeeded to think that AmigaOS would somehow fail given the same opportunity.
Why would that be? Linux worked on cheap, standard hardware. AmigaOs does not. AmigaOs is a retro-operating system working on retro-hardware. It is more important to preserve the interfaces than to extend it.

You really cannot compare Linux with AmigaOs.
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #48 on: February 16, 2020, 06:21:19 PM »
So you are afraid that open sourcing might attract more developers? *slow clap*
Yes, trolling again, thank you. Where did I say that? What I did say is that developers shouldn't make decisions concering the development of an overall product such as an operating system because they make them from the wrong perspective.

I afraid that developers would - as they often did in the past in Amiga land - confuse implementations with interfaces, and program against the former, not the latter. Interfaces are best to be documented (unlike Phase 5 and their makings) but not its implementation as it may be necessary to change the latter, though not the former.


 

Offline bison

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Posts: 59
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by bison
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #49 on: February 16, 2020, 06:26:46 PM »
Linux worked on cheap, standard hardware. AmigaOs does not.
Only because Hyperion does not want AmigaOS to work on cheap, standard hardware.  If the source code were open-sourced, it would almost certainly be ported to AMD64 and/or ARMv8.
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #50 on: February 16, 2020, 06:51:49 PM »
Linux worked on cheap, standard hardware. AmigaOs does not.
Only because Hyperion does not want AmigaOS to work on cheap, standard hardware.  If the source code were open-sourced, it would almost certainly be ported to AMD64 and/or ARMv8.
And why is that desirable? I mean, an Os that does not keep the system "operating" as it lacks elementary features such as memory protection and resource tracking, leave alone multi-core support?

All this beside, what would you gain with access to the original sources - which are about 30% assembler - and depend on the custom hardware of the AmigaOs? Thus, throw a lot away, redo from start, for something where somebody else had done that part of the work already - as in AROS?

Or do you mean AmigaOs 4? That is not even part of the discussion between the two.

AmigaOs is by design non-portable. If you want a portable source, take AROS - or a sane Os, such as Linux - in first place.
 

Offline cgutjahr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2003
  • Posts: 691
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by cgutjahr
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #51 on: February 16, 2020, 06:53:22 PM »
If you want to know who develops [p96], ask Jens. If you want to contribute, ask Jens. He's probably looking for someone to drive his product because I cannot.
So while you argued back in 2016 that P96 would end up in project management hell if it would be open sourced, it turns out there's likely no project management at all now that Jens controls it? Who could have seen that coming? It's not like we had evidence that Jens sucks at software project management, right? Oh wait, we did.

Let's keep that in mind for later.

A *lot*, because that is exactly what makes the difference. We do not have a critical mass of developers, we do not have sufficient numbers of commercial players.
The "numbers of developers" required to develop the OS doesn't depend on its proprietary or open status. Your team stays the same, so do your goals.

A lot would change, and I'm really stunned that you don't see that. We would not have one version of AmigaOs, but multiple.
Again: no we wouldn't. We would have one AmigaOS developed by one team. And maybe a fork or two using a different name, trying out different things. More likely just forks of individual components/libraries, because building Kickstart or entire distributions is a lot of work probably not all that simple.

Now let's compare that to the current situation: We have AmigaOS 3.9, Amiga OS 3.1.4, AmigaOS 3.X, AfA OS 4, AROS 68k and "BoingBag 4". Plus a whole bunch of what I refer to as 'Workbench distributions', like Amikit, AKReal, Coffin and UltimateWB. There's an icon.library replacement and an updated graphics (?) library on Aminet and Cosmos must have 'optimized' every single part of Kickstart by now. And that's just the 68k side of things...

Where's the actual change you keep warning us about?

To be able to keep development possible, we need to cut *down* the complexity, not increase it.
Obviously, the official OS sets the standards - you're not responsible for forks. Complexity problem solved. You're not trying to stay compatible with Peter's icon library, Cosmos' graphics optimizations or the non-standard init process of the Vampire right now, so why pretend you'd have to start doing that once AmigaOS is open source?

Which rules? Once it is open source, the ghost is out of the bottle.
Technically, it already is open source. I bet I can find the source on the net in less than a minute. And nobody's taking down projects like BB4 or Coffin (while, ironically, *your* project's right to exist is questioned in a court battle).

The rules are set by the party controlling the trademark. It really is that simple. Once that party ceases to exist or does what all of its predecessors did - i.e., fail miserably, creating tons of damage in the process - we might get the anarchy you're so afraid of. But we had that anarchy happen even without an open source OS, so once more: not different at all.

I would say that AmigaOs would be better if we had a specialist in UI design (and not a lawer) who would be central in decision making, yes.
A specialist in UI design is a developer of course. I was using the term as a shorthand for "people who work on the OS" - that includes a UI interface designer just like it includes the beta test coordinator or the translations/documentation people.

What we would need is a management that believes in its product (and not its money it may or may not make).
You're doing what you always do in these discussions: You admit the status quo is not good at all, but then go on to claim that a proprietary development path at least has the potential to improve things - while an open source approach will definitely kill and destroy everything and has zero chance of success.

So let me get this straight: We should trust you, that Ben doesn't completely f?ck up your OS project, like he f?cked up OS4 - half of which is now owned by another party that hates Ben's guts? And the reason we should put this much trust into him is that open source will definitely kill the Amiga?

My head hurts.
 

Offline Matt_H

Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #52 on: February 16, 2020, 07:00:30 PM »
I’ve got to agree with Thomas here. Without strong governance there is real risk of fragmentation from an open source model. We’ve suffered from that ever since the beginning of the post-Commodore era: MUI vs ReAction, NSD vs whatever the other thing was, P96 vs CGX, PowerUp vs WarpOS, and, of course, the big one, OS3 vs OS4 vs MorphOS vs AROS. Each of those splits has diminished the ability of the community to move the platform forward as a whole because each one has made it harder to achieve a critical mass of sustaining users.

Why is critical mass important? Look at what happened with AWeb. We had an open-source web browser! At the time it was the thing we needed most to make our Amigas usable in the modern world! And it fizzled out after just a few maintenance releases. If OS3 fragments we could see the same thing. As much as we want it to be true, open source isn’t a panacea for every situation. Instead of one slow-moving branch we could have 4 dead branches. Given the choice I’ll take the slow-moving branch, thank you.

Thomas is also right that a developer driven model is rarely one for long-term success. Go into a business class in any university and they’ll teach you that product development has to be driven by user needs. Remember the story from the pre-Commodore days when management essentially locked RJ Michal in a room to make him write the Intuition documentation? That was a user-centric decision. We don’t have that kind of structured, considered decision making anymore, and I honestly think we suffer for it. We all like to tinker and customize our systems and there is enormous overlap between developers and users in the community, but it’s not 1:1. I’m one of those idiots who could never get a handle on coding and as much as I love getting under the hood of my system there’s a limit as to how much I’m willing to do. I’ve tried so many times to like Linux, but it’s just a complete disaster beneath the surface. I don’t want to see the Amiga go the same way.

Ultimately, we all want the platform to be free from the corporate and legal shenanigans that are holding back development. I’m just skeptical that open sourcing the OS is the solution to that problem. Unfortunately, I don’t know what other solutions there are. What a mess!
 
The following users thanked this post: First Ninja

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #53 on: February 16, 2020, 07:23:26 PM »
A *lot*, because that is exactly what makes the difference. We do not have a critical mass of developers, we do not have sufficient numbers of commercial players.
The "numbers of developers" required to develop the OS doesn't depend on its proprietary or open status. Your team stays the same, so do your goals.
No, but the amount of work does. Is this so hard to understand? We *must* cut complexity down, and we cannot in an open source world. See Linux.

Again: no we wouldn't. We would have one AmigaOS developed by one team.
Yeah, right. (irony sign on) Plus a lot of trolling, plus a lot of "here is my branch of library YZX, take it or leave it", plus a lot of complains "waaa, they didn't take my patch". Thanks, but I guess we do better without that in a more ordered process.

More likely just forks of individual components/libraries, because building Kickstart or entire distributions is a lot of work probably not all that simple.
Yes, plus software of the form "requires library from A, not B". Thank you, great. Not that we don't have enough problems of this kind.

Now let's compare that to the current situation: We have AmigaOS 3.9, Amiga OS 3.1.4, AmigaOS 3.X, AfA OS 4, AROS 68k and "BoingBag 4". Plus a whole bunch of what I refer to as 'Workbench distributions', like Amikit, AKReal, Coffin and UltimateWB. There's an icon.library replacement and an updated graphics (?) library on Aminet and Cosmos must have 'optimized' every single part of Kickstart by now. And that's just the 68k side of things...
There is a consistency from 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.9 to 3.1.4. We tried our best to keep interfaces consistent and working, and more from 3.9 will work on 3.2.

I have absolutely no problem with workbench distributions. Keep them alive, that's all fine.

Where's the actual change you keep warning us about?
That this is not handle-able by a small team. It creates a lot of noise, binds a lot of resources, and lacks a direction.

Obviously, the official OS sets the standards - you're not responsible for forks.
Yeah, right. Except for the whining. "Waaa, your Os is broken, it does not work with software A". "But that requires the fork from B, not our base" "Waa, you suck".  Thank you, we already have enough of this bull.


Complexity problem solved.
No, created.

You're not trying to stay compatible with Peter's icon library, Cosmos' graphics optimizations or the non-standard init process of the Vampire right now, so why pretend you'd have to start doing that once AmigaOS is open source?
You'll see what will happen if we don't. Another fork.


Technically, it already is open source. I bet I can find the source on the net in less than a minute.
That isn't open source. It is piracy. Besides, it covers 3.1, not 3.1.4.1, which is quite a difference, despite the small difference in version numbering.

The rules are set by the party controlling the trademark. It really is that simple. Once that party ceases to exist or does what all of its predecessors did - i.e., fail miserably, creating tons of damage in the process - we might get the anarchy you're so afraid of. But we had that anarchy happen even without an open source OS, so once more: not different at all.
That's clear from the beginning. I can only express my opinion, though not influence the process.


A specialist in UI design is a developer of course.
Not in the sense I was using this term.

What we would need is a management that believes in its product (and not its money it may or may not make).
You're doing what you always do in these discussions: You admit the status quo is not good at all, but then go on to claim that a proprietary development path at least has the potential to improve things - while an open source approach will definitely kill and destroy everything and has zero chance of success.
And you do what you always do: Pretending that open sourcing the Os would solve these problems. It does not. It creates more problems. I do not need more problems, I need less.


So let me get this straight: We should trust you, that Ben doesn't completely f?ck up your OS project, like he f?cked up OS4 - half of which is now owned by another party that hates Ben's guts? And the reason we should put this much trust into him is that open source will definitely kill the Amiga?
I'm not "pro Ben", I'm "pro controlled development, no matter who does it". That is quite a difference.
 

Offline cgutjahr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2003
  • Posts: 691
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by cgutjahr
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #54 on: February 16, 2020, 07:29:04 PM »
MUI vs ReAction, NSD vs whatever the other thing was, P96 vs CGX, PowerUp vs WarpOS, and, of course, the big one, OS3 vs OS4 vs MorphOS vs AROS.
  • All of those were created despite AmigaOS being closed source
  • All of those were created while there was no active development of the official OS
  • All of those were resolved the second the official rights holder declared one of them to be the official solution

Quote
Why is critical mass important? Look at what happened with AWeb. We had an open-source web browser!
We also had an open source DPaint! Look at what happened! What do mean, "it was totally outdated by the time its source was released"?

Quote
As much as we want it to be true, open source isn’t a panacea for every situation.
Nobody's claiming that. But the situation is really, really fucked up. And Thomas and you are arguing "let's continue to try what we tried countless times in the last 25 years, one of these days it has to work, right?".

Quote
Instead of one slow-moving branch we could have 4 dead branches.
Why? Because Thomas and his guys rage-quit when the sources are released?

Quote
Thomas is also right that a developer driven model is rarely one for long-term success.
"Long term success"? We're discussing AmigaOS 3.x - where do you want it to go in 2020?
 

Offline First Ninja

Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #55 on: February 16, 2020, 07:30:57 PM »
@kolla - I'm just your friendly neighborhood AmigaOS user and not a moderator. That being said, of course everyone should think about their manners and refrain from being snark. Generally speaking, if your moral compass shows kittens and cuddles you usually know you are on the right track.
Karate, Jerry. Karate. It's the lifetime pursuit of balance and harmony.
 

Offline giZmo350

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Posts: 2053
  • Country: 00
  • Thanked: 27 times
  • GR, Michigan
    • Show only replies by giZmo350
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #56 on: February 16, 2020, 07:45:41 PM »
@Matt_H

SPOT ON! Bravo!  ;D

@Thomas Richter

"There is a consistency from 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.9 to 3.1.4. We tried our best to keep interfaces consistent and working, and more from 3.9 will work on 3.2. "

That is THE most important way forward IMHO!  8)

« Last Edit: February 16, 2020, 09:29:00 PM by giZmo350 »
A500: 2MB Chip, 8MB Fast, IndiECS, MiniMegi, IDE4ZorroII on Z-500, KS1.3/KS3.1, WB3.1&BWB
 
A2000HD: 2MB Chip, 128MB Fast, P5:Blizz 2060@50MHz, PCD-50B/4GBCF, XSurf100, RapidRoad, IndiECS, Matze RTG, MiniMegi, CD-RW, SunRize AD516, WB3.9
 
A1200: 2MB Chip, 64MB Fast, 4GBCF, GVP Typhoon 030 @40MHz w/FPU, Subway USB, EasyNet Ethernet, Indi AGA MKI, FastATA MK-IV, Internal Slim CD/DVD-RW, WB3.5

Surfing The Web With AMIGA Is Fun Again!
 

Offline cgutjahr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2003
  • Posts: 691
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by cgutjahr
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2020, 07:52:02 PM »
Plus a lot of trolling, plus a lot of "here is my branch of library YZX, take it or leave it", plus a lot of complains "waaa, they didn't take my patch". Thanks, but I guess we do better without that in a more ordered process.
[...]
Yeah, right. Except for the whining. "Waaa, your Os is broken, it does not work with software A". "But that requires the fork from B, not our base" "Waa, you suck".
So, when you say "anarchy" you actually mean people not being nice to you?

We *must* cut complexity down
You're not talking about complexity, you're talking about variety. Are you arguing we need to kill AROS 68k and Cloanto's distributions?

There is a consistency from 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.9 to 3.1.4
You're dodging the actual question. Let's ignore the lack of Reaction and say 3.9 and 3.1.4 are the same - that still leaves Amiga OS 3.1.4, AmigaOS 3.X, AfA OS 4, AROS 68k and BoingBag 4 plus the individual patches and libraries released on the Net. The existence of all these branches did not stop you from releasing 3.1.4, did it? So where's the limit before we loose you? Five, six, seven branches?

And you do what you always do: Pretending that open sourcing the Os would solve these problems.
I'm saying it at least gives us a chance of fixing these problems, while what you are doing right now just feeds the lawyers and is guaranteed to create tons more problems when (not if) Hyperion collapses.

I'm not "pro Ben", I'm "pro controlled development, no matter who does it".
Right now, Ben is controlling development - and you prefer that to open source. So as far as this discussion is concerned you are pro Ben. Which means you should be able to explain why Ben's control over your project doesn't mean it's doomed.
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2020, 08:08:05 PM »
  • All of those were created despite AmigaOS being closed source
  • All of those were created while there was no active development of the official OS
  • All of those were resolved the second the official rights holder declared one of them to be the official solution
All those where created because there was a disfunctional management at CBM who did not see the problems, *while* there was no active development, and a blant dummy management decision without all parties on the table.

How would open source solve these problems? Somebody in the wild making a decision - then some fraction accepts the solution, the other part creates a fork. Why is that a solution?

As said, the solution is to collect the knowledge we have in Amiga-land, form some kind of structure within which we create consensus, and then make decisions. This is how the world works in my business. Guess how JPEG was created? By competing parties finding consensus on a solution. "Consensus" does not mean that everybody is happy. It means "everybody is happy enough and the solution is acceptable, probably not brilliant, but acceptable".

Discussion within such a forum, with all the trolls outside the door, would have avoided a lot of the mess Heinz created with NSD. It would have probably found a solution for the GUI that is based on existing Os components like boopsis, and a functional management would have triggered an in-house creation of an RTG system.

You make the same error again: Pretending that Open Source solves these problems. It does not . People talking to each other, creating a solution by consensus would. Keeping this controlled, with a moderator and a management defining a direction would. Exclude people that have a big mouth would.

Nobody's claiming that. But the situation is really, really fucked up. And Thomas and you are arguing "let's continue to try what we tried countless times in the last 25 years, one of these days it has to work, right?".
I don't think I'm saying this in this thread. I'm saying "Open source is not the solution, here is a better one". Actually, I proposed one. Forgotten?

All this beside, it is pretty much academic as I have little to say in whatever happens. Hyperion's process is flawed, but Cloanto is either living in a dream world, or does not understand how this "community" works, or just fools with you.

Seriously, why should anyone create an open source fork *besides* Cloanto, and make this accessible, bypassing Cloanto. Why shouldn't I? I mean, after all, there is no inside knowledge within Cloanto, same as Hyperion (probably except Costel).

Why? Because Thomas and his guys rage-quit when the sources are released?
My stress level is already high enough. Why should I continue fighting with trolls about details and why their patch is not accepted? If Cloanto believes I'm taking this job, they bet wrong, that is for sure.

"Long term success"? We're discussing AmigaOS 3.x - where do you want it to go in 2020?
We talk long-term success, yes. A sustainable model.

The funny part is, two companies fighting about work-power they do not own, imposing a development model upon them, without giving much back and just creating fuzz.
 
The following users thanked this post: First Ninja

Offline Minuous

Re: "Hyperion and Cloanto allegedly close to finalizing settlement"
« Reply #59 from previous page: February 16, 2020, 09:15:20 PM »
You're dodging the actual question. Let's ignore the lack of Reaction and say 3.9 and 3.1.4 are the same - that still leaves Amiga OS 3.1.4, AmigaOS 3.X, AfA OS 4, AROS 68k and BoingBag 4 plus the individual patches and libraries released on the Net. The existence of all these branches did not stop you from releasing 3.1.4, did it? So where's the limit before we loose you? Five, six, seven branches?

BB3&4 is not really a "branch" of the OS. It is basically just a collection of bug fixes and optimizations. It does not introduce any incompatibilities. There are no new APIs, and no software that requires it to run.