* [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
@ 2003-06-16 23:43 Geoff Collyer
2003-06-16 23:51 ` ron minnich
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Geoff Collyer @ 2003-06-16 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
It was a smaller BOF than some, but lively. Other 9fans in attendance
included Dave Presotto of Bell Labs, Ron Minnich and Andrey
Mirtchovski of Los Alamos National Laboratories, Dan Cross, Eric Van
Hensbergen, now of IBM Austin Research, and Tom Glinos of the
University of Toronto. Also in attendance was Andrew Hume of AT&T
Research. There were others, many of whom I didn't recognise by
sight, probably 30 or so in total. Though much anticipated, no one
from Hanger 18 attended (or at least they didn't identify themselves).
No guns nor Harleys were in evidence.
The licence has been changed and I don't really understand the
implications, except that the Open Source Institute blessed the
penultimate version and declared it officially ``open source''. See
plan9.bell-labs.com/hidden/nntemplate.html. It might be worth
pointing the OpenBSD folks at this licence if they are serious about
using the Plan 9 C compilers.
The LANL folks demonstrated their little diskless 4-machine cluster
using Linuxbios and running Plan 9.
Dave Presotto announced that pxeload is working and that he will push
ipv6config and more power pc ports out to sources. IPSEC is not
happening, but he'd like to add process migration. Russ Cox is
preparing a new distribution (5e?).
Rob Pike had a fairly serious bicycle accident 2 - 3 weeks ago and I'm
sure we all wish him well. He has been back at work at Google
part-time.
I can't recall much else, but the BOF ran for two hours and a good
time was had by most, if not all. Many people adjourned to the hotel
bar (or just outside it, as Texas and San Antonio apparently have no
non-smoking laws).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
2003-06-16 23:43 [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003 Geoff Collyer
@ 2003-06-16 23:51 ` ron minnich
2003-06-17 2:24 ` Russ Cox
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ron minnich @ 2003-06-16 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans; +Cc: 9fans
I think the big excitement was the announcement that Plan 9 is going to be
open source. This opens it up to manuy new users that could not touch it
before. Great news.
ron
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
2003-06-16 23:43 [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003 Geoff Collyer
2003-06-16 23:51 ` ron minnich
@ 2003-06-17 2:24 ` Russ Cox
2003-06-17 3:22 ` northern snowfall
2003-06-18 0:45 ` Geoff Collyer
2003-06-18 1:08 ` [9fans] " Jim Choate
3 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2003-06-17 2:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
> The licence has been changed and I don't really understand the
> implications, except that the Open Source Institute blessed the
> penultimate version and declared it officially ``open source''. See
> plan9.bell-labs.com/hidden/nntemplate.html. It might be worth
> pointing the OpenBSD folks at this licence if they are serious about
> using the Plan 9 C compilers.
Try http://plan9.bell-labs.com/hidden/newlicense.html for
the real (i.e., non-templated) one.
> Russ Cox is preparing a new distribution (5e?).
I am? I mean, I am. There were plenty of little nits with the
install process that needed fixing, so this is taking a bit longer
than I had hoped. I also wanted to include some real content
rather than just a new license, so the new install will set up
fossil and venti servers if you so choose. I don't think there's
enough that changed to warrant calling it 5e, though.
Russ
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
2003-06-17 2:24 ` Russ Cox
@ 2003-06-17 3:22 ` northern snowfall
2003-06-17 2:39 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: northern snowfall @ 2003-06-17 3:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
>
>
>I am? I mean, I am. There were plenty of little nits with the
>install process that needed fixing, so this is taking a bit longer
>than I had hoped. I also wanted to include some real content
>rather than just a new license, so the new install will set up
>fossil and venti servers if you so choose. I don't think there's
>enough that changed to warrant calling it 5e, though.
>
Should we be getting ready for driver interfaces to change?
Network driver interfaces, dev.c changes, etc?
Don
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
2003-06-16 23:43 [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003 Geoff Collyer
2003-06-16 23:51 ` ron minnich
2003-06-17 2:24 ` Russ Cox
@ 2003-06-18 0:45 ` Geoff Collyer
2003-06-18 0:53 ` George Michaelson
2003-06-18 1:08 ` [9fans] " Jim Choate
3 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Geoff Collyer @ 2003-06-18 0:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
I apologise for the duplicated mail due to the alias 9fans@collyer.net
that got into mail headers (rather than being expanded); it's now
gone.
I hadn't intended to start a war; this is what I wrote:
``It might be worth pointing the OpenBSD folks at this licence if
they are serious about using the Plan 9 C compilers.''
That was just my thought in my personal notes and does not represent
anybody else's thoughts. That quote is based on some interest
expressed by the OpenBSD folks a few months back (more or less)
suggesting that they might use the Plan 9 compilers if the licence
were more liberal (my interpretation). It appeared that the new
licence was more liberal, given that the OSI had blessed much of it.
That's all. Nobody's mortgage was threatened and no one was
threatened with rape. I don't read the plan-9-licence mailing list,
so I'm undoubtedly out of touch with current licensing theology (no
pun intended).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [9fans] Re: Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
2003-06-16 23:43 [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003 Geoff Collyer
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2003-06-18 0:45 ` Geoff Collyer
@ 2003-06-18 1:08 ` Jim Choate
2003-06-18 1:06 ` David Presotto
3 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jim Choate @ 2003-06-18 1:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans; +Cc: hangar18-general
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Geoff Collyer wrote:
> sight, probably 30 or so in total. Though much anticipated, no one
> from Hanger 18 attended (or at least they didn't identify themselves).
'anticipated'? I don't believe that I or anyone else from the Austin group
said anything about going. <shrug>
We've been rather busy putting up nodes and such.
Thanks for the thought though.
> No guns nor Harleys were in evidence.
Believe me, there were lots of guns. Texas is the 7th largest armed group
on the planet.
The Harley's were in Austin two weeks ago, 40,000 of them if you believe
some of the claims.
--
____________________________________________________________________
We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I
are going to spend the rest of our lives.
Criswell, "Plan 9 from Outer Space"
ravage@ssz.com jchoate@open-forge.org
www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003
@ 2003-06-17 17:54 Todd C. Miller
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Todd C. Miller @ 2003-06-17 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
> The licence has been changed and I don't really understand the
> implications, except that the Open Source Institute blessed the
> penultimate version and declared it officially ``open source''. See
> plan9.bell-labs.com/hidden/nntemplate.html. It might be worth
> pointing the OpenBSD folks at this licence if they are serious about
> using the Plan 9 C compilers.
Unfortunately, OpenBSD can't really use the compiler unless it has
a license similar to that used by MIT, UC Berkeley, or the ISC.
Our goals are quite different from the OSI; we favor licenses that
are both clear and concise (the text of our preferred license is
just 10 lines on an 80-column terminal) and, most importantly, that
don't require a lawyer to interpret. Anything that creates a
tortious liability for us is simply not acceptable as we have no
financial means of defending ourselves.
As it stands, the new Lucent license is not something we can use.
This is unfortunate as continued development and expansion of the
plan9 toolchain is in the best interests of both the plan9 community
and the open source community at large. It would mean development
of additional CPU targets that could be used to bootstrap ports of
plan9 to currently unsupported platforms.
- todd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-06-18 5:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-06-16 23:43 [9fans] Plan 9 Usenix BOF, 12 June 2003 Geoff Collyer
2003-06-16 23:51 ` ron minnich
2003-06-17 2:24 ` Russ Cox
2003-06-17 3:22 ` northern snowfall
2003-06-17 2:39 ` Russ Cox
2003-06-17 3:39 ` northern snowfall
2003-06-18 0:45 ` Geoff Collyer
2003-06-18 0:53 ` George Michaelson
2003-06-18 5:53 ` boyd, rounin
2003-06-18 1:08 ` [9fans] " Jim Choate
2003-06-18 1:06 ` David Presotto
2003-06-18 1:09 ` Dan Cross
2003-06-17 17:54 [9fans] " Todd C. Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).