Comments for Jan Wildeboer http://jan.wildeboer.net Open {Source, Standards, Knowledge, Minds, Society} Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:44:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation by Radar Trend » Jan Wildeboer · The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/the-dutch-acta-leak-rough-translation/comment-page-1/#comment-951 Radar Trend » Jan Wildeboer · The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:44:06 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=617#comment-951 [...] See original here:  Jan Wildeboer · The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation [...] [...] See original here:  Jan Wildeboer · The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation [...]

]]> Comment on The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation by United States, Korea, Singapore, and Denmark Behind the Secrecy of the ACTA Conspiracy | Boycott Novell http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/the-dutch-acta-leak-rough-translation/comment-page-1/#comment-947 United States, Korea, Singapore, and Denmark Behind the Secrecy of the ACTA Conspiracy | Boycott Novell Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:51:10 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=617#comment-947 [...] round of talks at a meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico.” That was a while ago. There is now a Dutch ACTA leak (see article in Dutch) and the following new reports reveal some new information worth [...] [...] round of talks at a meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico.” That was a while ago. There is now a Dutch ACTA leak (see article in Dutch) and the following new reports reveal some new information worth [...]

]]> Comment on The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation by ACTA-bloggen » Blog Archive » Förhandlingsparternas inställning till öppenhet läckt http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/the-dutch-acta-leak-rough-translation/comment-page-1/#comment-937 ACTA-bloggen » Blog Archive » Förhandlingsparternas inställning till öppenhet läckt Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:49:02 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=617#comment-937 [...] Idag (25e feb) har ett dokument (ursprungligen på holländska) läckt som redogör för var förhandlingsparterna i ACTA står i frågan gällande ökad öppenhet och insyn i förhandlingarna. Det hårdaste motståndet mot full insyn i förhandlingarna står Singapore, Sydkorea och Danmark för, enligt den holländska rapporten. USA har inte tagit tydlig ställning i frågan, medan exempelvis Sverige har verkat för ökad insyn. Läs en snabbt ihoprafsad översättning till engelska från holländska här [...] [...] Idag (25e feb) har ett dokument (ursprungligen på holländska) läckt som redogör för var förhandlingsparterna i ACTA står i frågan gällande ökad öppenhet och insyn i förhandlingarna. Det hårdaste motståndet mot full insyn i förhandlingarna står Singapore, Sydkorea och Danmark för, enligt den holländska rapporten. USA har inte tagit tydlig ställning i frågan, medan exempelvis Sverige har verkat för ökad insyn. Läs en snabbt ihoprafsad översättning till engelska från holländska här [...]

]]> Comment on The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation by Jan Wildeboer: The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation | TuxWire : The Linux Blog Aggregator http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/the-dutch-acta-leak-rough-translation/comment-page-1/#comment-935 Jan Wildeboer: The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation | TuxWire : The Linux Blog Aggregator Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:30:21 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=617#comment-935 [...] See more here: Jan Wildeboer: The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation [...] [...] See more here: Jan Wildeboer: The dutch ACTA leak – rough translation [...]

]]> Comment on WRT FOSDEM Beer Event by Brian Swetland http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/wrt-fosdem-beer-event/comment-page-1/#comment-820 Brian Swetland Sun, 07 Feb 2010 05:21:01 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=592#comment-820 I'm confused about this "[are] they are willing to upstream their changes" point. Of course we are! We'd love to get our code upstream. If the upstream response is "we don't want that, throw it out and use this other thing" (which it is in some cases), we might not just jump at doing that, especially if it requires a huge effort across the entire Android stack to replace something that already works great for us with something somebody else would prefer we use instead. We've got a lot of work to do and devices to ship and a very small team to do this all with. If mainline says "your code sucks, we don't want it", that's certainly their right, but I then am puzzled about how we become the bad guys here. We're not refusing to give anybody the code. It's freely available under GPLv2. We have no illusion that things can get upstream without some change and some compromise, but from my perspective this has to be a two way street. If nobody wants to even attempt to meet us halfway, we're looking at far far more work to rewrite code that mainline doesn't like than to just keep rebasing our patchsets every other kernel version or so (as we have been since 2.6.14). I’m confused about this “[are] they are willing to upstream their changes” point. Of course we are! We’d love to get our code upstream.

If the upstream response is “we don’t want that, throw it out and use this other thing” (which it is in some cases), we might not just jump at doing that, especially if it requires a huge effort across the entire Android stack to replace something that already works great for us with something somebody else would prefer we use instead.

We’ve got a lot of work to do and devices to ship and a very small team to do this all with. If mainline says “your code sucks, we don’t want it”, that’s certainly their right, but I then am puzzled about how we become the bad guys here. We’re not refusing to give anybody the code. It’s freely available under GPLv2.

We have no illusion that things can get upstream without some change and some compromise, but from my perspective this has to be a two way street. If nobody wants to even attempt to meet us halfway, we’re looking at far far more work to rewrite code that mainline doesn’t like than to just keep rebasing our patchsets every other kernel version or so (as we have been since 2.6.14).

]]> Comment on Is Google forking the Linux kernel? by Brian Swetland http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/is-google-forking-the-linux-kernel/comment-page-1/#comment-819 Brian Swetland Sun, 07 Feb 2010 04:25:56 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=585#comment-819 We'd love to see Android support end up in the mainline kernel so you could build "out of the box" for Nexus One or other Android devices. We obviously have a number of areas where we do things differently than existing mainline infrastructure (though honestly fewer than a lot of people seem to think), which are not going to be quickly integrated: Mainline Linux, rightly so, has their standards and ways of doing things. Likewise, we are busy enabling millions of mobile devices to ship and throwing everything that's already working away and starting over is not a practical solution for us. Hopefully we'll all find some place to meet in the middle, but I'm sure this will take time. In the mean time, we pretty aggressively rebase against mainline roughly every other release (currently snapping up to 2.6.32, and will move to .33 or .34 after the upcoming "Froyo" platform release). We've been doing this since we started at 2.6.14 and will continue to do so. It's our hope that eventually the delta between our working trees and mainline will shrink over time and this process will only become easier. Our kernel code remains available in git repositories at http://android.git.kernel.org/, where we do active development and people are welcome to do whatever with it. It's all GPLv2 (with the occasional BSD licensed piece). Share and enjoy! Brian We’d love to see Android support end up in the mainline kernel so you could build “out of the box” for Nexus One or other Android devices.

We obviously have a number of areas where we do things differently than existing mainline infrastructure (though honestly fewer than a lot of people seem to think), which are not going to be quickly integrated: Mainline Linux, rightly so, has their standards and ways of doing things. Likewise, we are busy enabling millions of mobile devices to ship and throwing everything that’s already working away and starting over is not a practical solution for us. Hopefully we’ll all find some place to meet in the middle, but I’m sure this will take time.

In the mean time, we pretty aggressively rebase against mainline roughly every other release (currently snapping up to 2.6.32, and will move to .33 or .34 after the upcoming “Froyo” platform release). We’ve been doing this since we started at 2.6.14 and will continue to do so. It’s our hope that eventually the delta between our working trees and mainline will shrink over time and this process will only become easier.

Our kernel code remains available in git repositories at http://android.git.kernel.org/, where we do active development and people are welcome to do whatever with it. It’s all GPLv2 (with the occasional BSD licensed piece). Share and enjoy!

Brian

]]> Comment on Why we need Neelie (and some don’t want her) by neelie kroes - StartTags.com http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/01/why-we-need-neelie-and-some-dont-want-her/comment-page-1/#comment-818 neelie kroes - StartTags.com Sun, 07 Feb 2010 01:35:31 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=555#comment-818 [...] - Het kabinet draagt opnieuw VVD-politica Neelie Kroes voor als Nederlandse eurocommissaris. ...Jan Wildeboer · Why we need Neelie (and some don't want her)Neelie Smit-Kroes, most famous for her decisions wrt Microsoft in the various competitive cases, is [...] [...] – Het kabinet draagt opnieuw VVD-politica Neelie Kroes voor als Nederlandse eurocommissaris. …Jan Wildeboer · Why we need Neelie (and some don't want her)Neelie Smit-Kroes, most famous for her decisions wrt Microsoft in the various competitive cases, is [...]

]]> Comment on Is Google forking the Linux kernel? by Jan Wildeboer · Is Google forking the Linux kernel? | Drakz Free Online Service http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/is-google-forking-the-linux-kernel/comment-page-1/#comment-809 Jan Wildeboer · Is Google forking the Linux kernel? | Drakz Free Online Service Fri, 05 Feb 2010 10:57:26 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=585#comment-809 [...] the original post here: Jan Wildeboer · Is Google forking the Linux kernel? Share and [...] [...] the original post here: Jan Wildeboer · Is Google forking the Linux kernel? Share and [...]

]]> Comment on WRT FOSDEM Beer Event by Identi.ca Updates for 2010-02-04 « FU-BAR http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/wrt-fosdem-beer-event/comment-page-1/#comment-808 Identi.ca Updates for 2010-02-04 « FU-BAR Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:06:35 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=592#comment-808 [...] but with food for thought rt @jwildeboer: New blog post: WRT FOSDEM Beer Event http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/wrt-fosdem-beer-event/ [...] [...] but with food for thought rt @jwildeboer: New blog post: WRT FOSDEM Beer Event http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/wrt-fosdem-beer-event/ [...]

]]> Comment on WRT FOSDEM Beer Event by Links 4/2/2010: Scientific Linux Reviewed, Google Tablets | Boycott Novell http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/02/wrt-fosdem-beer-event/comment-page-1/#comment-806 Links 4/2/2010: Scientific Linux Reviewed, Google Tablets | Boycott Novell Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:09:06 +0000 http://jan.wildeboer.net/?p=592#comment-806 [...] WRT FOSDEM Beer Event FOSDEM is about having fun *and* exchanging opinions. We should have both. [...] [...] WRT FOSDEM Beer Event FOSDEM is about having fun *and* exchanging opinions. We should have both. [...]

]]>