FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Masters Of The Universe

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-13-2008, 11:55 PM
Giancarlo Niccolai
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello;

I'd like to report a problem that is concerning the naming of two
packages that are being concurrently racing for inclusion in the very
next version of Ubuntu.

I would argue that the way MOTU have managed the whole situation is
questionable under the "Ubuntu Code of Conduct" that we all have signed.

I came to Ubuntu as I wanted to issue my first official release of the
Falcon Programming Language

http://www.falconpl.org

under the distro which I most respect, for its philosophy of mutual
help and support which is reflected in the Code of Conduct. The very
heart of my project is exactly "Respect for Developers", which drove
my will to write a language written not "to parse logs" or "to keep
finger warm", but exactly to help people write better programs, and to
help applications to be better applications.

When I prospected my project in #ubuntu-motu I have been positively
accepted by the community; so I started writing a module; I searched
Debian and Ubuntu repositories, and the net in search of debian
packages named Falcon. Having not found them, I went for "falcon" as
package name. People in MOTU told me that the naming of the package
was fine, although some of them knew of a packaging utility written in
python that was called "falcon.py". I offered to change the name of
the package to falconpl, that was also the name of the site, but I
have been told (sorry if I call people by nick), by pochu, persia and
others that the name was ok, and to proceed. I have talked also with
Minghua and many others.

So I uploaded the package on December 6 2007 in Revu. I got comments
through #ubuntu-motu channel, and I updated each time to fix problems
reported by MOTU reviewers. The records are in

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/174470
http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=falcon

On December the 20th 2007, a Motu (possibly Imbradon, but I am not
sure), told me that the project called "falcon" had possibly a
/usr/bin/falcon instance, which the Falcon programming language has
too (it's the main interpreter, as /usr/bin/python or /usr/bin/ruby).
As that was a tool used by some Motus to handle packages, although
there was no package being submitted up to that date, it would have
been a pity if there was a name clash in future, so I should have
sorted out the situation.

I immediately mailed the author, sending him this mail:

- -------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <476AD25B.9060001@falconpl.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:36:43 +0100
From: Giancarlo Niccolai <gc@falconpl.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dennis@kaarsemaker.net
Subject: "Falcon" name in namespace.
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0
OpenPGP: id=12030B86; url=keyserver.ubuntu.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

hello,

I am the author of an open source software called "The Falcon
Programming Language". I am submitting a package to Ubuntu, and I
have been warned about possible namespace collisions.

The main concern is about the "falcon" binary file, which is the
compiler/interprter of the language (like python), and other binary
names as libfalcon_engine.so.

Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is no
current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my package
"falconpl", which is also the name of the site:

http://www.falconpl.org

However, it is necessary that we get in contact so that we can see if
there may be some name clash now or in the future, in order to avoid it.

I am quite open to any proposal.

I usually hang around in #ubuntu-motu or in #falconpl.

Bests,
Giancarlo Niccolai.
================================================== ===================

This my reply on its reply (I think it's useless to repaste it twice)

- ------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <476BF4B6.8060901@falconpl.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:15:34 +0100
From: Giancarlo Niccolai <gc@falconpl.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dennis Kaarsemaker <dennis@kaarsemaker.net>
Subject: Re: "Falcon" name in namespace.
References: <476AD25B.9060001@falconpl.org>
<1198230256.6930.9.camel@mirage>
In-Reply-To: <1198230256.6930.9.camel@mirage>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
> On do, 2007-12-20 at 21:36 +0100, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote:
>
>
>> I am the author of an open source software called "The Falcon
>> Programming Language". I am submitting a package to Ubuntu, and I
>> have been warned about possible namespace collisions.
>>
>> The main concern is about the "falcon" binary file, which is the
>> compiler/interprter of the language (like python), and other binary
>> names as libfalcon_engine.so.
>>
>
> The places where I see collisions are
>
> 1) The package name
> 2) /usr/{bin,share,share/doc}/falcon
> 3) Manpage name
>
>
>> Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is no
>> current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my package
>> "falconpl", which is also the name of the site:
>>
>> http://www.falconpl.org
>>
>
> Correct, 'my' falcon has not been uploaded to Ubuntu yet for a variety
> of reasons, so no conflict should exist.
>
>
>> However, it is necessary that we get in contact so that we can see if
>> there may be some name clash now or in the future, in order to avoid it.
>>
>> I am quite open to any proposal.
>>
>
> Renaming the package would unfortunately only remove two naming
> conflicts (package name and /usr/share/doc). The other conflict can only
> be resolved by renaming one of the /usr/bin/falcon files.
>
> I don't think it's really necessary to do that actually since both
> falcons serve two distinct niches which will have little overlap, if
> any. So my suggestion is to only rename the package and not the binary
> unless you don't mind renaming your /usr/bin/falcon to /usr/bin/falconpl
>
> What do you think?
>
Renaming the package doesn't cause any trouble. Renaming /usr/bin/falcon
would cause a bit of harassment as the automated build environment
creates a lot of dependencies (i.e. windows build system requires
falcon.exe to be there, double click shortcuts, ini files), not to talk
about #!/usr/bin/falcon headers on scripts.

About the overlap, if the language gets moment it may be virtually on
any machine, so it's a thing that we should try to work on.

Bests,
Giancarlo.

P.s. I should be around somewhere this night as "jonnymind" on IRC.

================================================== ===================

I had no other communication. Just, I noticed Imbradon's notice on
revu's entry
tonight:
"
There is already another project in the archives named "falcon" this
source and
binarys will likely have to be renamed ( and make sure both are
co-installable )
"

Checking the "falcon" project,
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/falcon

I see that the package has been loaded on "2008-01-11"; it has been
reviewed
and fixed in the same day, and then immediately published.

I have been in #MOTU about every day, and I offered full and open
co-operation
both to the MOTU and to this project author; My project was discussed
and seen
by the persons involved in release, yet, they just created a clean
package and
immediately published it without even bothering notifying this fact.

The chat session of this night is even more enlightening:

gen 13 20:01:04 jonnymind imbradon:I read your notice about "there
is already a package named falcon.
gen 13 20:01:38 jonnymind However, the notice is imprecise.
gen 13 20:02:24 * amarillion
(n=martijn@212-123-137-98.ip.telfort.nl) entrato in #ubuntu-motu
gen 13 20:02:30 jonnymind the bug "needs packaging" for my project
has been opened in 2007, while the other package with the same name
was opened in 2008.
gen 13 20:03:18 * cassidy` si disconnesso (Remote closed the
connection)
gen 13 20:03:24 jonnymind Moreover, I was negotiating with those
person about the package and binary names. We were talking about what
to do, then the conversation stopped and the other package has been
started.
gen 13 20:03:33 jonnymind I think we should discuss a bit the
namespace question.
gen 13 20:03:57 * cassidy (n=cassidy@dhansak.collabora.co.uk)
entrato in #ubuntu-motu
gen 13 20:06:02 jonnymind And also, frankly decide what to do
basing on an objective criterion.
gen 13 20:08:16 jonnymind imbradon:?

<rip>

en 13 23:18:06 ScottK jonnymind: Conflicts is more usually used for
packages that provide equivalent functionality.
gen 13 23:18:37 jonnymind ScottK: that is absolutely true.
gen 13 23:19:13 ScottK jonnymind: Have you discussed this with
imbrandon?
gen 13 23:19:26 * jekil (n=alessand@151.82.16.79) entrato in
#ubuntu-motu
gen 13 23:19:38 pochu jonnymind: (I'm not blaming you, just in case
I'm not expressing well)
gen 13 23:20:46 Nafallo Seveas and imbrandon.
gen 13 23:20:52 * Knightlust si disconnesso (Read error: 104
(Connection reset by peer))
gen 13 23:20:59 TheMuso s/c
gen 13 23:21:03 TheMuso ugh damn keyboard
gen 13 23:21:32 jonnymind ScottK: No, I have discussed with the
original author of the other falcon.
gen 13 23:21:45 pochu That's Seveas.
gen 13 23:21:46 jonnymind Well, I have started the discussion and
replied to its e-mail.
gen 13 23:21:55 jonnymind In which he stated he wasn't going to
make a package.
gen 13 23:22:07 ScottK jonnymind: Right, and he didn't
gen 13 23:22:15 pochu (which is true, the package was done by
imbrandon)
gen 13 23:22:24 pochu ScottK: you beat me
gen 13 23:22:33 jonnymind Ah.
gen 13 23:22:42 * pochu is eating pizza, so he's not that fast
gen 13 23:22:50 ScottK jonnymind: My concern right now (not having
a great interest in either package) is that if you upload your package
as falcon to Debian, then it's going to cause trouble between Ubuntu
and Debian that it would be better to avoid.
gen 13 23:22:52 jonnymind So Imbradon knew there was a falcon
package made in december.
<rip>
gen 13 23:23:15 Seveas packages for 'the other falcon' have existed
since 2006
<rip>
gen 13 23:25:52 jonnymind Seveas: again; the package here is named
falconpl now.
gen 13 23:25:59 jonnymind That closes the question.
gen 13 23:26:30 Nafallo both packages use /usb/bin/falcom? :-)
gen 13 23:26:36 Nafallo s/m/n
gen 13 23:26:42 jonnymind I do.

<rip>

gen 13 23:59:19 pochu And out of curiosity: a package needs two
ACKs to be uploaded to Universe... who did ACK falcon other than
imbrandon?
gen 13 23:59:22 jonnymind Nafallo: I am not changing 6 system
installation scripts and 300 doc pages for this.
gen 13 23:59:30 Nafallo pochu: *sigh* you probably know exactly
what I mean, so why even argue about it? :-)
gen 13 23:59:36 jonnymind Someone will find a way to package falcon
when it is included in the other distros.
gen 13 23:59:57 Seveas pochu, could be persia, I did the final
checks with them
gen 14 00:00:26 jonnymind I started packaging from ubuntu because I
beleived in ubuntu philosophy of respect.
gen 14 00:00:28 jonnymind ...
gen 14 00:00:37 pochu Seveas: I'd be surprised if it was persia
since persia was reviewing jonnymind's falcon package.
gen 14 00:01:42 pochu And since there's no REVU upload for it to
look at, nor ACK in the needs-packaging bug...
gen 14 00:01:51 * keffie_jayx si disconnesso (Connection timed out)
gen 14 00:04:25 Nafallo pochu: I just check my logs. persia :-)
gen 14 00:04:41 * Kmos (n=gothicx@unaffiliated/kmos) entrato in
#ubuntu-motu
gen 14 00:04:47 pochu Crap.
gen 14 00:04:59 * pochu kicks persia

...

=================================================

I have a "falconpl" ubuntu package with the "Conflict: falcon" entry
in debian/control sitting on my hard disk;
it was a mediated solution suggested and required by some enlighted
MOTUs, and I gladly accepted;
but in the moment I was going to upload it I received this notification:

- ------ Original Message --------
Return-path: <bounces@canonical.com>
Envelope-to: gc@niccolai.cc
Delivery-date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:55:44 -0800
From: Nafallo Bjlevik <nafallo@magicalforest.se>
<rip headers>
X-Generated-By: Launchpad (canonical.com)


This package source and binary needs to be renamed. We already have
falcon. Please make sure they are co-installable.

================================================== ====

This was right in the middle of our discussion about name clashes and
Conflict: field.



The point is: I have opened a falcon package in Debian, and I will do
it with other distros as well, as Fedora,
Suse and Mandrake. The falcon programming language is already
installed in production environments under Windows and
MacOS; I would have gladly mediated some solution for Ubuntu
"/usr/bin/falcon" naming problem, but this
possibility has been willfully snatched away for unknown reasons. As
the space for a mediation has been
removed by this behavior which is intentionally breaking the Code of
Conduct, I am forced to resume the
technical reasons why I ask to be granted the /usr/bin/falcon program
name:

1) Falcon P.L. is a stand-alone binary application; falcon.py is a
python script proxied by an alias command.
2) The "falcon" (langauge) command is common to several architectures,
including Windows and MacOS, some
of which have special handling of application registration which is
part of our project.
3) Falcon codebase is several hundred thousands lines and growing.
Many of this lines refer to the name of
the main interpreter. falcon.py script is a relatively small
application.
4) Falcon language (to be found as "falcon" command) is currently used
in production environments, and changing
its name may affect third party applications.
5) Falcon language documentation is several hundreds pages long, and
reviewing it in search of the main interpreter
name would be an extensive activity.
6) Falcon language copyright goes since 2004, with activity actually
started in 2003. Falcon.py has been started in
2005-2006.
7) Falcon is known as script language name in Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scripting_language)
8) Falcon language Packages for other distros (i.e.) RPM will be
organized having /usr/bin/falcon.
9) Although user count between the two projects is currently not
directly comparable, the number of potential
users of a repository utility for a specific subset of debian
distributions and a multiplatform scripting
language is not a match.
10) Users already using Falcon would be impacted by the main
interpreter name change, as it is the base to
launch scripts and other applications, falcon.py script is only
conventionally summoned with /usr/bin/falcon
at the command line by end-users.

It seems there isn't a single technical/objective reason why the
falcon.py script project should be granted
/usr/bin/falcon name, except for a direct involvement of some of the
MOTUs in its release.

I openly admit that I have opened a package request on Debiabn with
the name "falcon" as I knew about this
package being just snapped in without an open discussion. I am still
ready to negotiate the package name,
as *I* do beleive in the principles written on the Code of Conduct,
that I have signed, and I don't want
to cause unnecessary problems in a project that I still regard as a
bright example of what mankind should
be one day.

Yet, the "falcon" command will be present in many distributions, and
it is now available in many environments
and O/S. I hope the community discuss openly and peacefully this
argument considering the technical
aspects of the question.

Best regards,
Giancarlo Niccolai.
















-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHirL65nwsoBIDC4YRAnq8AJ4mY3Gj+GXr2hOMFJ1g5x uMpvAZdgCfZB0W
ttWtMzQV2h/UBwGUhhZDuRI=
=FsCR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 01-14-2008, 01:31 AM
Giancarlo Niccolai
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello;


I'd like to report a problem that is concerning the naming of two
packages that are being concurrently racing for inclusion in the very
next version of Ubuntu.

I would argue that the way MOTU have managed the whole situation is
questionable under the "Ubuntu Code of Conduct" that we all have signed.

I came to Ubuntu as I wanted to issue my first official release of the
Falcon Programming Language

http://www.falconpl.org

under the distro which I most respect, for its philosophy of mutual
help and support which is reflected in the Code of Conduct. The very
heart of my project is exactly "Respect for Developers", which drove
my will to write a language written not "to parse logs" or "to keep
finger warm", but exactly to help people write better programs, and to
help applications to be better applications.

When I prospected my project in #ubuntu-motu I have been positively
accepted by the community; so I started writing a package; I searched
Debian and Ubuntu repositories, and the net in search of debian
packages named Falcon. Having not found them, I went for "falcon" as
package name. People in MOTU told me that the naming of the package
was fine, although some of them knew of a packaging utility written in
python that was called "falcon.py". I offered to change the name of
the package to falconpl, that was also the name of the site, but I
have been told (sorry if I call people by nick), by pochu, persia and
others that the name was ok, and to proceed. I have talked also with
Minghua and many others.

So I uploaded the package on December 6 2007 in Revu. I got comments
through #ubuntu-motu channel, and I updated each time to fix problems
reported by MOTU reviewers. The records are in

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/174470
http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=falcon

On December the 20th 2007, a Motu (possibly Imbradon, but I am not
sure), told me that the project called "falcon" had possibly a
/usr/bin/falcon instance, which the Falcon programming language has
too (it's the main interpreter, as /usr/bin/python or /usr/bin/ruby).
As that was a tool used by some Motus to handle packages, although
there was no package being submitted up to that date, it would have
been a pity if there was a name clash in future, so I should have
sorted out the situation.

I immediately mailed the author, sending him this mail:

- -------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <476AD25B.9060001@falconpl.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:36:43 +0100
From: Giancarlo Niccolai <gc@falconpl.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dennis@kaarsemaker.net
Subject: "Falcon" name in namespace.
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0
OpenPGP: id=12030B86; url=keyserver.ubuntu.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

hello,

I am the author of an open source software called "The Falcon
Programming Language". I am submitting a package to Ubuntu, and I
have been warned about possible namespace collisions.

The main concern is about the "falcon" binary file, which is the
compiler/interprter of the language (like python), and other binary
names as libfalcon_engine.so.

Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is no
current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my package
"falconpl", which is also the name of the site:

http://www.falconpl.org

However, it is necessary that we get in contact so that we can see if
there may be some name clash now or in the future, in order to avoid it.

I am quite open to any proposal.

I usually hang around in #ubuntu-motu or in #falconpl.

Bests,
Giancarlo Niccolai.
================================================== ===================

This my reply on its reply (I think it's useless to repaste it twice)

- ------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <476BF4B6.8060901@falconpl.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:15:34 +0100
From: Giancarlo Niccolai <gc@falconpl.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dennis Kaarsemaker <dennis@kaarsemaker.net>
Subject: Re: "Falcon" name in namespace.
References: <476AD25B.9060001@falconpl.org>
<1198230256.6930.9.camel@mirage>
In-Reply-To: <1198230256.6930.9.camel@mirage>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
>> On do, 2007-12-20 at 21:36 +0100, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> I am the author of an open source software called "The Falcon
>>>> Programming Language". I am submitting a package to Ubuntu,
>>>> and I have been warned about possible namespace collisions.
>>>>
>>>> The main concern is about the "falcon" binary file, which is
>>>> the compiler/interprter of the language (like python), and
>>>> other binary names as libfalcon_engine.so.
>>>>
>>
>> The places where I see collisions are
>>
>> 1) The package name 2) /usr/{bin,share,share/doc}/falcon 3)
>> Manpage name
>>
>>
>>>> Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is
>>>> no current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my
>>>> package "falconpl", which is also the name of the site:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.falconpl.org
>>>>
>>
>> Correct, 'my' falcon has not been uploaded to Ubuntu yet for a
>> variety of reasons, so no conflict should exist.
>>
>>
>>>> However, it is necessary that we get in contact so that we
>>>> can see if there may be some name clash now or in the future,
>>>> in order to avoid it.
>>>>
>>>> I am quite open to any proposal.
>>>>
>>
>> Renaming the package would unfortunately only remove two naming
>> conflicts (package name and /usr/share/doc). The other conflict
>> can only be resolved by renaming one of the /usr/bin/falcon
>> files.
>>
>> I don't think it's really necessary to do that actually since
>> both falcons serve two distinct niches which will have little
>> overlap, if any. So my suggestion is to only rename the package
>> and not the binary unless you don't mind renaming your
>> /usr/bin/falcon to /usr/bin/falconpl
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
Renaming the package doesn't cause any trouble. Renaming /usr/bin/falcon
would cause a bit of harassment as the automated build environment
creates a lot of dependencies (i.e. windows build system requires
falcon.exe to be there, double click shortcuts, ini files), not to talk
about #!/usr/bin/falcon headers on scripts.

About the overlap, if the language gets moment it may be virtually on
any machine, so it's a thing that we should try to work on.

Bests,
Giancarlo.

P.s. I should be around somewhere this night as "jonnymind" on IRC.

================================================== ===================

I had no other communication. Just, I had a glimpse on Imbradon's
notice on
revu's entry
tonight:
"
There is already another project in the archives named "falcon" this
source and
binarys will likely have to be renamed ( and make sure both are
co-installable )
"

Checking the "falcon" project,
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/falcon

I see that the package has been loaded on "2008-01-11"; it has been
reviewed
and fixed in the same day, and then immediately published.

I have been in #MOTU about every day, and I offered full and open
co-operation both to the MOTU and to this project author; My project
was discussed
and seen by the persons involved in release, yet, they just created a
clean
package and immediately published it without even bothering notifying
this fact.

The chat session of this night is even more enlightening:

gen 13 20:01:04 jonnymind imbradon:I read your notice about "there
is already a package named falcon.
gen 13 20:01:38 jonnymind However, the notice is imprecise.
gen 13 20:02:24 * amarillion
(n=martijn@212-123-137-98.ip.telfort.nl) entrato in #ubuntu-motu
gen 13 20:02:30 jonnymind the bug "needs packaging" for my project
has been opened in 2007, while the other package with the same name
was opened in 2008.
gen 13 20:03:18 * cassidy` si disconnesso (Remote closed the
connection)
gen 13 20:03:24 jonnymind Moreover, I was negotiating with those
person about the package and binary names. We were talking about what
to do, then the conversation stopped and the other package has been
started.
gen 13 20:03:33 jonnymind I think we should discuss a bit the
namespace question.
gen 13 20:03:57 * cassidy (n=cassidy@dhansak.collabora.co.uk)
entrato in #ubuntu-motu
gen 13 20:06:02 jonnymind And also, frankly decide what to do
basing on an objective criterion.
gen 13 20:08:16 jonnymind imbradon:?

<rip>

en 13 23:18:06 ScottK jonnymind: Conflicts is more usually used for
packages that provide equivalent functionality.
gen 13 23:18:37 jonnymind ScottK: that is absolutely true.
gen 13 23:19:13 ScottK jonnymind: Have you discussed this with
imbrandon?
gen 13 23:19:26 * jekil (n=alessand@151.82.16.79) entrato in
#ubuntu-motu
gen 13 23:19:38 pochu jonnymind: (I'm not blaming you, just in case
I'm not expressing well)
gen 13 23:20:46 Nafallo Seveas and imbrandon.
gen 13 23:20:52 * Knightlust si disconnesso (Read error: 104
(Connection reset by peer))
gen 13 23:20:59 TheMuso s/c
gen 13 23:21:03 TheMuso ugh damn keyboard
gen 13 23:21:32 jonnymind ScottK: No, I have discussed with the
original author of the other falcon.
gen 13 23:21:45 pochu That's Seveas.
gen 13 23:21:46 jonnymind Well, I have started the discussion and
replied to its e-mail.
gen 13 23:21:55 jonnymind In which he stated he wasn't going to
make a package.
gen 13 23:22:07 ScottK jonnymind: Right, and he didn't
gen 13 23:22:15 pochu (which is true, the package was done by
imbrandon)
gen 13 23:22:24 pochu ScottK: you beat me
gen 13 23:22:33 jonnymind Ah.
gen 13 23:22:42 * pochu is eating pizza, so he's not that fast
gen 13 23:22:50 ScottK jonnymind: My concern right now (not having
a great interest in either package) is that if you upload your package
as falcon to Debian, then it's going to cause trouble between Ubuntu
and Debian that it would be better to avoid.
gen 13 23:22:52 jonnymind So Imbradon knew there was a falcon
package made in december.
<rip>
gen 13 23:23:15 Seveas packages for 'the other falcon' have existed
since 2006
<rip>
gen 13 23:25:52 jonnymind Seveas: again; the package here is named
falconpl now.
gen 13 23:25:59 jonnymind That closes the question.
gen 13 23:26:30 Nafallo both packages use /usb/bin/falcom? :-)
gen 13 23:26:36 Nafallo s/m/n
gen 13 23:26:42 jonnymind I do.

<rip>

gen 13 23:59:19 pochu And out of curiosity: a package needs two
ACKs to be uploaded to Universe... who did ACK falcon other than
imbrandon?
gen 13 23:59:22 jonnymind Nafallo: I am not changing 6 system
installation scripts and 300 doc pages for this.
gen 13 23:59:30 Nafallo pochu: *sigh* you probably know exactly
what I mean, so why even argue about it? :-)
gen 13 23:59:36 jonnymind Someone will find a way to package falcon
when it is included in the other distros.
gen 13 23:59:57 Seveas pochu, could be persia, I did the final
checks with them
gen 14 00:00:26 jonnymind I started packaging from ubuntu because I
beleived in ubuntu philosophy of respect.
gen 14 00:00:28 jonnymind ...
gen 14 00:00:37 pochu Seveas: I'd be surprised if it was persia
since persia was reviewing jonnymind's falcon package.
gen 14 00:01:42 pochu And since there's no REVU upload for it to
look at, nor ACK in the needs-packaging bug...
gen 14 00:01:51 * keffie_jayx si disconnesso (Connection timed out)
gen 14 00:04:25 Nafallo pochu: I just check my logs. persia :-)
gen 14 00:04:41 * Kmos (n=gothicx@unaffiliated/kmos) entrato in
#ubuntu-motu
gen 14 00:04:47 pochu Crap.
gen 14 00:04:59 * pochu kicks persia

...

=================================================

I have a "falconpl" ubuntu package with the "Conflict: falcon" entry
in debian/control sitting on my hard disk;
it was a mediated solution suggested and required by some enlighted
MOTUs, and I gladly accepted;
but in the moment I was going to upload it I received this notification:

- ------ Original Message --------
Return-path: <bounces@canonical.com>
Envelope-to: gc@niccolai.cc
Delivery-date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:55:44 -0800
From: Nafallo Bjlevik <nafallo@magicalforest.se>
<rip headers>
X-Generated-By: Launchpad (canonical.com)


This package source and binary needs to be renamed. We already have
falcon. Please make sure they are co-installable.

================================================== ====

This was right in the middle of our discussion about name clashes and
Conflict: field.



The point is: I have opened a falcon package in Debian, and I will do
it with other distros as well, as Fedora,
Suse and Mandrake. The falcon programming language is already
installed in production environments under Windows and
MacOS; I would have gladly mediated some solution for Ubuntu
"/usr/bin/falcon" naming problem, but this
possibility has been willfully snatched away for unknown reasons. As
the space for a mediation has beenremoved by this behavior which
is intentionally breaking the Code of Conduct, I am forced to
resume the technical reasons why I ask to be granted the
/usr/bin/falcon program name:

1) Falcon P.L. is a stand-alone binary application; falcon.py is a
python script proxied by an alias command.
2) The "falcon" (langauge) command is common to several architectures,
including Windows and MacOS, some
of which have special handling of application registration which is
part of our project.
3) Falcon codebase is several hundred thousands lines and growing.
Many of this lines refer to the name of
the main interpreter. falcon.py script is a relatively small
application.
4) Falcon language (to be found as "falcon" command) is currently used
in production environments, and changing
its name may affect third party applications.
5) Falcon language documentation is several hundreds pages long, and
reviewing it in search of the main interpreter
name would be an extensive activity.
6) Falcon language copyright goes since 2004, with activity actually
started in 2003. Falcon.py has been started in
2005-2006.
7) Falcon is known as script language name in Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scripting_language)
8) Falcon language Packages for other distros (i.e.) RPM will be
organized having /usr/bin/falcon.
9) Although user count between the two projects is currently not
directly comparable, the number of potential
users of a repository utility for a specific subset of debian
distributions and a multiplatform scripting
language is not a match.
10) Users already using Falcon would be impacted by the main
interpreter name change, as it is the base to
launch scripts and other applications, falcon.py script is only
conventionally summoned with /usr/bin/falcon
at the command line by end-users.

It seems there isn't a single technical/objective reason why the
falcon.py script project should be granted /usr/bin/falcon name,
except for a direct involvement of some of the MOTUs in its release.

I openly admit that I have opened a package request on Debiabn with
the name "falcon" as I knew about this package being just snapped
in without an open discussion. I am still ready to negotiate the
package name, as *I* do beleive in the principles written on the
Code of Conduct, that I have signed, and I don't want to cause
unnecessary problems in a project that I still regard as a bright
example of what mankind should be one day.

Yet, the "falcon" command will be present in many distributions, and
it is now available in many environments and O/S. I hope the
community discuss openly and peacefully this argument considering
the technical aspects of the question.

Best regards,
Giancarlo Niccolai.

















-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHismL5nwsoBIDC4YRAu8eAJ9I/sXj5ooYnile394diDp4coudjACePWok
1uNktTn5IhWxrEdDLsDUlQ4=
=K8KP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 03:42 AM
Scott Kitterman
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Sunday 13 January 2008 21:31, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote:
...
> Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is no
> current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my package
> "falconpl", which is also the name of the site:
...
> gen 13 23:22:50 ScottK jonnymind: My concern right now (not having
> a great interest in either package) is that if you upload your package
> as falcon to Debian, then it's going to cause trouble between Ubuntu
> and Debian that it would be better to avoid.

My suggestion is to call your package falconpl as you've said you would and
then conflict against falcon. After that, we can let the market decide. If
one of these packages gets popular enough to cause the other difficulty with
the conflicts, then the less popular one will move their file in /usr/bin.

As for accusations of CoC violations, you need to address those to the MOTU
Council. They have their own list:

motu-council <motu-council@lists.ubuntu.com>

Scott K

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 11:33 AM
Morten Kjeldgaard
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

Scott Kitterman wrote:

> My suggestion is to call your package falconpl as you've said you would and
> then conflict against falcon. After that, we can let the market decide. If
> one of these packages gets popular enough to cause the other difficulty with
> the conflicts, then the less popular one will move their file in /usr/bin.

I second that. I seems to me that Giancarlo has not understood what several
people have already attempted to explain on IRC, and that Scott also writes
above. Thus, let me try again to make it clear:

It is required that there is no package name clash, and by choosing
falconpl as the package name, that has been achieved.

The remaining problem is the clash of binary names. Dpkg has a way of
dealing with that, and that is the Conflicts: tag in debian/control.

This ensures that the packages falcon and falconpl can not be installed at
the same time on a given computer. But that is a small price to pay, and
given the small user bases of Falcon the programming language, and falcon
the repo manager, the likelihood of a situation where a user wants both
packages installed, is close to nil.

We already have git the VCS and git the GNU file browser (git-core vs.
git). I am sure that there are numerous other program name clashes in
Ubuntu/Debian; programs with generic names like display, show, merge, find,
link, config etc. are common and countless.

I see no point of making a big fuzz about this rather trivial problem. Put
a Conflicts: tag in control, and Bob's your uncle.

Cheers,
Morten (aka mok0)

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:15 PM
"Emmet Hikory"
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Jan 14 January 2008 11:31 AM, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote:
> Up to date, several MOTUs have checked and reported there is no
> current namespace clash. I am also willing to call my package
> "falconpl", which is also the name of the site:

On Jan 14, 2008 1:42 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> My suggestion is to call your package falconpl as you've said you would and
> then conflict against falcon. After that, we can let the market decide. If
> one of these packages gets popular enough to cause the other difficulty with
> the conflicts, then the less popular one will move their file in /usr/bin.

I don't have a strong opinion about which is the right falcon, but
such a Conflicts: would be wrong. Section 10.1 of the Debian Policy
Manual (1) clearly states, in part:

Two different packages must not install programs with different
functionality but with the same filenames. (The case of two programs
having the same functionality but different implementations is handled
via "alternatives" or the "Conflicts" mechanism. See Maintainer
Scripts, Section 3.9 and Conflicting binary packages - Conflicts,
Section 7.3 respectively.) If this case happens, one of the programs
must be renamed. The maintainers should report this to the
debian-devel mailing list and try to find a consensus about which
program will have to be renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached,
both programs must be renamed.

Regarding the dispute, I suggest that we follow a similar
procedure as in Debian. The conflict should be discussed on this list
(as opposed to debian-devel), and if a consensus is reached, that
solution followed. If no consensus is reached, no package uses
/usr/bin/falcon for now.

On Jan 14 January 2008 11:31 AM, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote:
> I would argue that the way MOTU have managed the whole situation is
> questionable under the "Ubuntu Code of Conduct" that we all have signed.

This should be discussed in the parallel thread in another forum,
as recommended by Scott, and any resolution of any possible CoC issues
do not affect the technical problem of two packages providing a single
filename with two different functionalities.

1: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html

--
Emmet HIKORY

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:39 PM
Soren Hansen
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:15:41PM +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion about which is the right falcon, but
> such a Conflicts: would be wrong. Section 10.1 of the Debian Policy
> Manual (1) clearly states, in part:

I think this process makes sense.

IMO, the programming language should allowed to be /usr/bin/falcon.
Changing the name of the interpreter will mean that any program that is
supposed to be interpreted by falcon will need to be patched. OTOH,
renaming the binary in Dennis' repository management thing has very
limited consequences.

--
Soren Hansen
Ubuntu Server Team
http://www.ubuntu.com/
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:48 PM
Giancarlo Niccolai
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
> Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
>> My suggestion is to call your package falconpl as you've said you would and
>> then conflict against falcon. After that, we can let the market decide. If
>> one of these packages gets popular enough to cause the other difficulty with
>> the conflicts, then the less popular one will move their file in /usr/bin.
>>
>
> I second that. I seems to me that Giancarlo has not understood what several
> people have already attempted to explain on IRC, and that Scott also writes
> above. Thus, let me try again to make it clear:
>
> It is required that there is no package name clash, and by choosing
> falconpl as the package name, that has been achieved.
>
> The remaining problem is the clash of binary names. Dpkg has a way of
> dealing with that, and that is the Conflicts: tag in debian/control.
>
To be clear: I second this decision TOO. I have actually already DONE
IT. I was going to *upload* it, when a second negative advocating was
posted, right in the middle of the chat session where other MOTUs (i.e.
ScottK) were resolving for this solution:
---------------------

Return-path: <bounces@canonical.com>
Envelope-to: gc@niccolai.cc
Delivery-date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:55:44 -0800
From: =?utf-8?q?Nafallo_Bj=C3=A4levik?= <nafallo@magicalforest.se>
X-Generated-By: Launchpad (canonical.com)
....

This package source and binary needs to be renamed. We already have
falcon. Please make sure they are co-installable.

---------------------
As I received this notify, I understood there was the need of bringing
up the topic to find a solution, as just "renaming the binary" is a bit
cryptic, and the conversation on the chat was going on like "change the
name of /usr/bin/falcon, and DON'T even try to use Conflict!" . I don't
say this is unacceptable, but I wanted that to be discussed, and to be
discussed considering the alternative you just said.

So, mor0, it was not me not having understood what you're saying here.

As my position about falconpl/Conflict is anyhow clearly left open in my
first mail, (in which I am just asking for an open discussion, and state
10 points why changing the /usr/bin/falcon program name would be
problematic) it seems it has not be fully read; I understand, there was
much material in that.

> I see no point of making a big fuzz about this rather trivial problem. Put
> a Conflicts: tag in control, and Bob's your uncle.
>
That was the point. I raised the fuzz, technically, because the decision
was too controversial, and there was the need for an open discussion,
and morally because there was NO NEED to just sneak in then other
package. We had already half an agreement to go like that; some open
discussion in the channel would have just resolved the question. What I
want to know is just if it is correct, under the CoC terms, to just
unilaterally do things and then ask others to conforms, even when an
open and cooperative mood has been shown on the other side. As if it is
so, I am missing the whole point of "ubuntu", which is very important to me.

Bests,
Giancarlo Niccolai.


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 01:01 PM
Daniel Holbach
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Mo, 2008-01-14 at 14:39 +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> IMO, the programming language should allowed to be /usr/bin/falcon.
> Changing the name of the interpreter will mean that any program that is
> supposed to be interpreted by falcon will need to be patched. OTOH,
> renaming the binary in Dennis' repository management thing has very
> limited consequences.

That's a very good and reasonable solution.

Have a nice day,
Daniel



--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 03:17 PM
Stephan Hermann
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Mo, 2008-01-14 at 14:39 +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:15:41PM +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion about which is the right falcon, but
> > such a Conflicts: would be wrong. Section 10.1 of the Debian Policy
> > Manual (1) clearly states, in part:
>
> I think this process makes sense.
>
> IMO, the programming language should allowed to be /usr/bin/falcon.
> Changing the name of the interpreter will mean that any program that is
> supposed to be interpreted by falcon will need to be patched. OTOH,
> renaming the binary in Dennis' repository management thing has very
> limited consequences.
>

Well, as I understand this falcon language is not even uploaded to the
archive, so there can't be any other package which is depending on
#!/usr/bin/falcon, or did I miss something?

Emmets statement about the way of doing this, is imho the right way, and
it comes to the same result to what I said earlier.

Regards,

sh

--
SysAdmin, OSS Developer
GPG-Key ID: 0xC098EFA8
Fingerprint: 3D8B 5138 0852 DA7A B83F DCCB C189 E733 C098 EFA8
http://www.sourcecode.de/


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-14-2008, 05:12 PM
Soren Hansen
 
Default Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 05:17:49PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > IMO, the programming language should allowed to be /usr/bin/falcon.
> > Changing the name of the interpreter will mean that any program that
> > is supposed to be interpreted by falcon will need to be patched.
> > OTOH, renaming the binary in Dennis' repository management thing has
> > very limited consequences.
> Well, as I understand this falcon language is not even uploaded to the
> archive, so there can't be any other package which is depending on
> #!/usr/bin/falcon, or did I miss something?

Not in the archive, but if falcon is going to be named /usr/bin/falcon
*everywhere* else in the world, then all scripts that are meant to be
interpreted by falcon will have "#!/usr/bin/falcon" in their header, so
for no sensible reason *at* *all* you will have to change every single
falcon script before it can run on Ubuntu, which is completely
pointless.

--
Soren Hansen
Ubuntu Server Team
http://www.ubuntu.com/
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org