There were a number of factors which doomed the previous effort.  The
main ones were lack of time on the part of the organizers, and the
upcoming 4.0 release.  Basically, we appointed gatekeepers to review
patches, much as is done for OpenACS, but all of the gatekeepers (I
was one) were too busy to do the reviewing in a timely manner.  And
many of us had a feeling that perhaps we were wasting our time
enhancing 3.x, since we thought 4.0 would be out Real Soon Now.  That
was about a year and a half ago...

With 4.0 still impending, and looking more likely now that Tcl 8.4 has
been released, I don't think it makes much sense for any of us to
spend time enhancing 3.x at this point.  If we do anything at all, I
think we should just take the 3.3+ad13 and 3.4 tarballs, change the
identification string to say OpenNSD, tar them up with an appropriate
name, and make them available from a one-page site which just explains
that this is the current version and that there will be more of a
project structure and participation when 4.0 comes out.  Anything more
will be too much of a distraction from the OpenACS and dotLRN
releases, and probably not worth the effort at this time.

If folks agree that this is the way to go, I'll set up the site and
make the tarballs.  I'll give interested parties a chance to comment
on the text before it goes live.  We can offer RPMs if someone else
wants to make them;  that's not a project I can tackle right now.

Assuming folks want to go ahead with this there is one other thing to
decide, and that's what URL to use.  opennsd.org/net are owned by "DRS
Expired Domain", which I presume is a cyber-squatter who snaps up
expired domains.  Through register.com I could make an offer to buy
them for a minimum of $200 each, but I think what these folks do is
really slimey and I hate to give them the money.  opennsd.com is owned
by Scott Goodwin, who would probably let us use it, but a .com address
really isn't right for a project like this.

We could reserve open-nsd in any variations we like -
org/net/com/info?  They are all available.  So how do folks feel about
going with the hyphenated domain name?  It's not optimal, but
personaly I'd rather do that and get the right extension.  I'm willing
to pay for it, though anyone who wants to chip in is welcome.

Let the discussion begin!

From a development project view, I've heard the AOLserver folks have been officially told not to work with the community anymore because we've wasted their time trying to convince them we can help rather than hinder their process. I would hate to fork violently so that they decide to withdraw further into closing their license (although their prior code is dual-licensed under the GPL). That's a worst case scenario, and probably unlikely.
Still, their code is getting released, and it is damn good. Would hate to risk any of that at all.

Simply in the interest of getting a better sense of why this is a good idea, can a short history of the problem be written, or at least can a direction to a previous summary be given? As well as summary of what's happened since the split and why we should follow through.

If we do split, I think that we should make it a subproject of dev.openacs.org, which is where the next gen site is right now.

talli

Perhaps OpenACS.org should have an NS.openACS.org site that keeps a current AOLserver with a customized configuration complete with OpenACS related patches?

In other words, create a sort of evolving ad13+.. project for OpenACS.org

This arrangement hopefully:

1. respects the aolserver community and their work (per Talli's comments)

2. keeps the OpenACS community from having to duplicate much of the AOLserver work as the software evolves and potentially adds features, compatibility to evolving OSes and internet standards etc.

3. Provides a platform for immediate application of OpenACS specific patches documentation etc.

4. Provides a strong foundation should aolserver's licence become nonGPL'd at some point.

5. Does not require another domainname registration etc.

6. Keeps the OpenACS community from having to generate and foster another independent developer community (with all of its obligations, responsibilities etc.)

In the short term we can get around this by just making tarballs available.  In the medium term we might let people upload patches which would be available on an as-is, un-reviewed basis.  Ultimately we'd want to have the same sort of process as we have here at OpenACS, where patches are looked at before being accepted.  But we haven't got the manpower to make that happen right now.

I will go ahead and register open-nsd.*.

Seriously, there have been previous threads about marketing and AOLserver suggesting that a marketing approach might address any biz-buzz resistance from business types.  I'm continuing to gather notes for marketing an AOLserver/OpenNSD configuration.

If anyone intends to stop their marketing creation efforts because of OpenNSD, please post your incomplete work (or forward a copy to me and others), so work can continue using the marketing approach to address AOLserver resistance --your efforts, of course, would/should be recognized in any finished work. These efforts should still be valuable as the material still applies.

I definitely think we should keep it very, very simple for now - just a little introductory text, a place for people to upload patches, and of course a way to download everything.  If 4.0 isn't out by the time we've released OpenACS and dotLRN and caught our collective breaths, then we can talk about doing more.  For now, it's mostly just to make resources available, and to get the name OpenNSD on people's minds.

See how easy it is to sell this stuff?

talli

Apache 1 became a messy hairball because they accepted patches based on community votes.