December 2003 - admin@common-lisp.net - mailman3.common-lisp.net

[admin] added cl-pdf; owned by mbattyani
by root 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

Add successful at 2003.12.12.13.22.

1 0

[admin] added mod-lisp; owned by mbattyani
by root 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

Add successful at 2003.12.12.13.22.

1 0

[admin] Embarrassing..
by Luke Gorrie 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

Hi guys, I, uh, forgot the administrator password for the slime-devel mailing list. Can't find the email anywhere. Could you please reset it, e.g. to the string in ~lgorrie/slime-devel.password ? Swear it won't happen again.. :-)

1 0

[admin] new project suggestion
by Yurii A. Rashkovskii 11 Dec '03

11 Dec '03

> As far as I understand, LLGPL is also permitted on cl.net? >Yes. All OSI/DSFG free licenses are OK. Ok. So, if you will approve my project entry for hosting, I'd like to use LLGPL. Thanks in advance, Yurii.

2 1

Re: [admin] new project suggestion
by Yurii A. Rashkovskii 11 Dec '03

11 Dec '03

> > I'd prefer the license issues were settled before a hosting decision > is made. We generally recommend MIT/BSD-style licenses, and LLGPL over > GPL, but GPL is ok too. > > Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "development engine". Is > that another name for IDE, or something totally different? Basically, it is a set of libraries to build frame and workflow-based applications atop of them and probably some tool applications inside (not sure yet). > > Otherwise I approve -- pending the license. Well, GPL seems to meet most of my requirements for licensing issues, so I'll prefer using it. P.S. By the way, is there any way to use Arch revision system on common-lisp.net? Thanks in advance, Yurii.

3 3

[admin] new project suggestion
by Yurii A. Rashkovskii 11 Dec '03

11 Dec '03

Marco, >> Well, GPL seems to meet most of my requirements for licensing >> issues, so I'll prefer using it. >This means that you can't _use_ BSD code and distribute the result. > >>From section 2 of the GPL: >----- >b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in >whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part >thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties >under the terms of this License. >----- >This means that you'll have to find a GPL'd compiler to target, and >you'll only be able to use GPL'd libraries. The fact the lisp leaves >you no option but to "link" directly to other code makes the GPL far >more restrictive than it is for compile-edit-debug languages. In fact, I'm really far away from open source licensing issues and can't eloborate precisely at this time. Also I've thought about LLGPL, probably it will be really better than GPL for Lisp development. As far as I understand, LLGPL is also permitted on cl.net?

2 1

[admin] new project suggestion
by Yurii A. Rashkovskii 11 Dec '03

11 Dec '03

Hello, Is it possible to host the following project? Project name: Encline Description: Encline is a Common Lisp based development engine based on frame database and workflow technologies. License: Most probably, GPL or LLGPL (still thinking about this issue) My full name is Yurii A. Rashkovskii Thanks in advance, Yurii.

3 2

Re: [admin] mailing lists for mod_lisp, cl-pdf and cl-typesetting]
by Erik Enge 10 Dec '03

10 Dec '03

"Marc Battyani" <marc.battyani(a)fractalconcept.com> writes: > OK, tell me when you have reached a consensus on the subject ;-) You're getting three fullblown projects. :) > BTW I've never given CVS access to others. Is there a mechanism to > accept/reject the changes. Not in CVS, really. I usually dole out CVS access to those who've already sent me good patches. If they commit something I don't like to the CVS tree I tell them so and they fix it. At common-lisp.net you ask us to add members to your project at which point they have full access to your CVS tree. > Where are the lispniks who write code instead of just talking? On IRC: #lisp on freenode.net. Erik.

2 1

Re: [admin] mailing lists for mod_lisp, cl-pdf and cl-typesetting]
by Marc Battyani 10 Dec '03

10 Dec '03

From: "Nikodemus Siivola" <nikodemus(a)random-state.net> writes: > Oops. Accidentally sent this just to the admin-list. I noticed it was a mailing list only at the third email... > > But I could at least add a project page if you want. > > Nah. I don't see much point in putting up a project page when the > project is elsewhere. OK, tell me when you have reached a consensus on the subject ;-) > > I've seen this but it's what I have done with mod_lisp and cl-pdf and the > > users/contributors ratio is a fairly good approximation of 0. :( > > Er. I see the tarballs, yes. But no CVS (or other) repositories. The > difference is really a big one. > > People who are likely to help want the bleeding edge: if it's broken > they can try to fix it. If it works fine (like releases tend to) > they'll just use it -- and don't touch the source until there's > something they want from it. What I am looking for is not really fixer but contributors. > Also, it's nice to know that what you have is a good approximation of > what the author has. > > > Releasing software takes time, you get lots of emails asking for support, > > etc... And time is the resource I'm missing the most! So I prefer to work on > > cl-typesetting to release it only when it's usable by an average user. > > So it's not that I'm against releasing it it's just that I don't think the > > advantages would be so great. > > The point is that anonCVS / whatever is not the same as a release. > > People who tracks CVS don't generally expect the same level of support > as people who use released. And when they do, they should be told that > things don't work like that. ;-) > > Tarball = for users > Repository = for developers Good point. BTW I've never given CVS access to others. Is there a mechanism to accept/reject the changes. > > BTW I'm ok to discuss this on a suitable place if c.l.l is not the good one. > > (or by email) > > Clump might be a fertile place to get people's views on this > release/devel-access dichtomy. Better signal to noise ratio. Ok I will probably put the debate there... I agree that in c.l.l the signal is almost lost in the noise. Where are the lispniks who write code instead of just talking ? I also posted to lispweb but it's almost empty. Marc

2 1

Re: [admin] mailing lists for mod_lisp, cl-pdf and cl-typesetting
by Erik Enge 10 Dec '03

10 Dec '03

"Marc Battyani" <marc.battyani(a)fractalconcept.com> writes: > I received several suggestions to setup mailling lists for mod_lisp, > cl-pdf and cl-typesetting. Can I do this on common-lisp.net ? Can we call it 'mod-lisp' instead? We use Unix groups to enforce permissions and the group name is the same as the project name. Erik.

1 0