Layers.library V45 on the aminet

[modrobert]

The only realistic method for achieving this is a H&P bounty for the release of OS3.9 sources.

Great idea. OS3.1 as well. Open source or die (trying)!

BTW: I'm typing this on my A1200, so no more recommendations to use Aros, that's best suited for a PC.


PS:

Have a good weekend everyone, especially those who disagree. High time to turn up the volume in HippoPlayer, goose bumps galore. Nothing really beats Amiga, does it?

[wawrzon]

Drawback of open source. You cannot have an "open source that works only how you want it to work". That's a closed source model.

as if closed source software behaved always as the user expects..

[BSzili]

I don't see the point of rewriting ReAction, Installer and all the rest from scratch when I already have them...I don't really have time to do that and write applications too. Even if I did, there's no reason to think they would get put into AROS, as it seems fairly clear that they are MUI zealots, standards be damned. Plus even a complete reimplementation would still be just a reimplementation, not the real thing.

I understand why you aren't interested in rewriting the ReAction classes, I also get why aren't you wouldn't want anything besides the real thing®, but could you please refrain from making these baseless allegations? There have been interest from many AROS developers for an open source ReAction reimplementation, but no one was interested in writing them.

[guest11527]

as if closed source software behaved always as the user expects..

Sorry, but you don't get my point. A model where "one person defines how it works", is a closed source model. If the makers of AROS prefer MUI, then that's it. If *I* want something else, and I want nobody to talk into my decisions, I have to run my software as closed source. That's then the only option. Of course, the resulting software might still not work as its users want it to work, but at least it works how I want it...

[wawrzon]

Sorry, but you don't get my point. A model where "one person defines how it works", is a closed source model. If the makers of AROS prefer MUI, then that's it. If *I* want something else, and I want nobody to talk into my decisions, I have to run my software as closed source. That's then the only option. Of course, the resulting software might still not work as its users want it to work, but at least it works how I want it...

quite contrary it seems, if aros devs prefer zune you are still free to introduce reaction yourself, if os4 devs do not want zune then thats it, the user has to live with it.

[yssing]

So this awesome update is released, it is just awesome that new stuff are being published for our aging classics.!

I fail to see why some guys need to be so negative about updates, if you don't like updates, don't install them.

[psxphill]

quite contrary it seems, if aros devs prefer zune you are still free to introduce reaction yourself, if os4 devs do not want zune then thats it, the user has to live with it.

You're still missing his point, but I'm now more interested in how os4 devs could stop you running zune?
 
 

I fail to see why some guys need to be so negative about updates, if you don't like updates, don't install them.

If someone graffiti's your house and you don't like it, then you don't have to look at it.

[Gulliver]

If someone graffiti's your house and you don't like it, then you don't have to look at it.

They don´t graffiti your house, they just offer the service, it is upto you to decide if you want to. The service is still there, but it is optional

[psxphill]

They don´t graffiti your house, they just offer the service, it is upto you to decide if you want to. The service is still there, but it is optional

No, you agreed to it without realising what it was you were signing up for.

[OlafS3]

>But then make it less half-baked by contributing to it.

I don't see the point of rewriting ReAction, Installer and all the rest from scratch when I already have them...I don't really have time to do that and write applications too. Even if I did, there's no reason to think they would get put into AROS, as it seems fairly clear that they are MUI zealots, standards be damned. Plus even a complete reimplementation would still be just a reimplementation, not the real thing.

>You need to talk to the people and offer your service. The result will not be open source, though. You'll probably need to sign a NDA or some other form of contract.  Or only if you *also* invest the same amount of work. Yes, it is *really* that simple.

Why would anyone want to do unpaid work on a piece of closed-source commercial software which is still being sold!? In the case of OS4 I don't even have a machine that will run it (not having a spare $5000 or so lying around), so it's out of the question. And as you point out, the result still would not be open source.

>I'm just saying that your demand is quite unrealistic.  
>But again, if you want something somebody else spend a lot of time and sweat in building, you shouldn't expect to get this for free.

I'm not demanding anything, what am I expecting to get for free? I have pointed out some of what's missing from AROS which keeps me on OS3.9, from a user perspective. I'm not demanding anyone else implement this, it seems obvious after 15 years that it won't be implemented. They're wondering why people don't want to use AROS, and I'm giving them the answer. As simple as that. Surely I have the right to say why I don't use something without having to volunteer years of unpaid labour on a piece of software I don't even like. By that logic, if I say why I don't like Windows, I have to go do unpaid work for Microsoft.

>Well, then set this up if you think this is going to work. I don't know how much you're going to pay for that, but if you can pay out Animo and/or H&P, and the developers that contributed to 3.9, that may also work.

I wouldn't be able to contribute much but I would certainly put some money towards such a bounty. I don't know whether I would be the best one to negotiate with them on the community's behalf though. I'd rather such an important bounty be managed by someone who has already a proven track record of managing bounties, if that's at all possible.

More on topic, I can confirm the incompatibility of Birdie with the new layers.library. Do you know which of the two components is to blame?

I do not understand again what you are saying. As long as we talk about Aros 68k (and this thread is about 68k) you do NOT need to reimplement installer because you simple copy it in C and it works. And on the same way you can add ClassAct (I have not tested Reaction because it is not free). And you can add MUi 38, the same way, and BGUI and ... that is how I created my distribution. Aros 68k on its base (minus Desktop) is reimplementation of a core 3.1. installation including Roms and AHI, CybergraphX 3, Intuition, Gadtools, dos.library and so on. You can easily replace Zune, you can use another desktop, you can do almost everything with it. It is not devil, not "ugly" how you called it. I do not understand your attitude and why you do not react on other comments. You said everything is missing and I asked you to name a few of what is missing. I still await the answer.

[warpdesign]

A model where "one person defines how it works", is a closed source model.

I didn't know the Linux kernel was closed source

It's been open source since day one. And Linus has been defining how it should work since
1994. This doesn't prevent lots of unofficial patches, forks,.. though as well as lots of official fixes, patches,.. That were contributed by how many devs ? A hundred ? Yet, only one person decides. This wouldn't have been possible if it had been closed source...

You may decide and stay opened... At least outside of the Amiga circle. I'm not sure this is possible here: most open source projects lack direction/guidance. And lots of people still deciding would rather see their software die rather than risking loosing control and.. Ownership.

[Gulliver]

No, you agreed to it without realising what it was you were signing up for.

Then you should better start reading the readme files, they are not there to occupy space

Unless, there is some truth in that there is a secret coven of devilish coders that fool users into installing things that are said to be rock solid and fool proof when they are exclusively created to pervert their soul (and miggy systems)

[Thorham]

I fail to see why some guys need to be so negative about updates, if you don't like updates, don't install them.

Exactly. Someone updates a system library, and everyone and their cat has an opinion about it.

If someone graffiti's your house and you don't like it, then you don't have to look at it.

I suppose that means you don't like PeterK's icon.library, either?

[Minuous]

>But you expect others that they make their work available for free and invest this time? How charming...

Where have I said that I expect this? I don't want anything for free. All my programs are already open source freeware. I don't have unlimited time/motivation for coding, if I work on one thing, it comes at the expense of working on another thing.

I'm not an AROS developer and I don't want to be an AROS developer. Same goes for MOS and OS4. (I'm speaking of OS development here, not application development.) Reimplementing the same things 4 times for 4 similar-but-different OSes doesn't seem a very efficient way of moving things forwards.

>But then it's your turn to change it. Why don't you implement the missing bits and pieces, after all?

I suppose I could answer every bug report I get about my software in this manner: "It's open source, fix it yourself."

>No, by that logic you can either buy another product

Yes, I bought OS3.9.

>What's unreal about a re-implementation?

Neither the source nor the binary would be the same. The handling of undocumented functionality would also probably be erroneous. Unless one was to look at a disassembled AmigaOS to confirm, which is not allowed when reverse engineering. Additionally, a release of official AmigaOS source would be more likely to gain interest and/or attention from the wider (non-Amiga) community.

>Why would you want to do unpaid work on closed-source commercial software that runs on obsolete hardware? This is neither logical.

Well, not to get rich, that's for sure. But it makes more sense than working on OS4/MOS, at least no one would be making money off my hard work.

>If the makers of AROS prefer MUI, then that's it.

Fine, they should stop pretending it's somehow equivalent to the official AmigaOS though. And I certainly am not interested in using, let alone developing, such a program.

>none will open source amiga system, none will probably even answer to such enquiries, none will establish a bounty and almost none will contribute to it.

Why do you say this? There have been many successful bounties to open source Amiga applications, eg. DOpus. Surely it is at least worth making the attempt before giving up.

>But it is no option that Microsoft will release the windows source-code for free

Where did I suggest H&P release OS3.9 source for free? Obviously that would be a good outcome but hardly likely. Which is why I proposed a bounty. And yes, as I said, I'm willing to make a contribution to such a bounty. How is this wanting something for free?

>It is not devil, not "ugly" how you called it. I do not understand your attitude and why you do not react on other comments. You said everything is missing and I asked you to name a few of what is missing. I still await the answer.

Has someone redrawn those atrocious icons by now then? As for what's missing, the answer is most of OS3.5/3.9.

AROS is not the devil, just not something that is of any use to me. And I would not normally do development of software that I do not even use. Surely most contributors to open source projects are the same.

>if aros devs prefer zune you are still free to introduce reaction yourself,

Fork AROS? Then we have 5 Amiga-like OSes instead of 4, hardly an improvement.

>As far as Birdie is concerned: I don't have a contact to its author. Do you?

No, he doesn't seem to be active any more. This is probably a case where a Cosmos-style patch (to Birdie, not layers.library) would be useful.

[wawrzon]

Why do you say this? There have been many successful bounties to open source Amiga applications, eg. DOpus. Surely it is at least worth making the attempt before giving up.

there were some successful larger aros bounties (open sourcing poseidon usb stack) and two or three other bigger bounties (dopus magellan and odyssey), all organized by people whom you are arguing against, olaf as example. the bounties were successful because the people in question actually did something instead of bragging and demanding. and remember magellan bounty has not been met. the owners agreed to lesser amount. and now you are talking abut the bounty for whole operating system. it will not be another ten thousand dollar bounty im sure. if it was i might have been interested few years ago when there might have been enough people to support it. anyways if you want to risk money parked on some account for years, go for it and try, but judging by this thread alone there isnt much interest anymore.

Has someone redrawn those atrocious icons by now then?

i took a shot at it, as well as an iff theme that works well on planar gfx. theme is about half done and proven working, but there is bugs in themeing i had to wait to be fixed but none did. maybe matthias is about to do it now. i dont know. i did some research to find an appropriate icon convention too, but after some basics i have lost motivation for now. takes much more time than just posting in forums, which is what people are primarly interested in so why really bother.

Fork AROS? Then we have 5 Amiga-like OSes instead of 4, hardly an improvement.

why fork? you can just contribute the missing classes and mui and reaction programs will work fine side by side like they do on aos, or are you demanding to remove the feature of mui compatibility altogether losing this functionality, because you hate it? but in this case why at all improve the system? by this logic everything is fine as is. you are a bit hard to understand i must admit.

[biggun]

If you read the posts and rantings here,
then one could come to the conclusion :
that for those who actaully  spend time on working on AMIGA software
it will be smart to not publish the software, or it least not to announce it at a forum like this .