Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:04 UTC
SkyOS Over the past couple of months, I've been getting a number of emails asking me about SkyOS' status. Since I didn't know anything beyond what's on the SkyOS website, and because, well, I have no affiliation with SkyOS, I couldn't really reply to these emails. However, after yet another email sent to me late last week, I decided to simply... Email Robert Szeleney, the man behind the project.
Thread beginning with comment 411797
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: open source?
by danieldk on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 16:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: open source?"
danieldk
Member since:
2005-11-18

I hope he doesn't make the same mistake as Tal Danzig of Libranet: he was hoping to make a fortune from Libranet code, and he killed the project in the process (not that a real comparison is possible, Libranet was a great OS from every point of view, still missed by its fans).


That is not completely true, however I understand that from the outside that may have been the impression. Tal had been talking to a company, but also to some Libranet users with a development background. The idea was that if we could come up with a good proposal, that Adminmenu and the Libranet installer would become open source. Having a sound plan was important to Tal since, for obvious reasons, the code was very dear to him.

We made a proposal for 'OpenLibranet', and while we were in agreement technically, we could not agree on a full plan. The thing was that he wanted us to make a first version (OpenLibranet 3.1), and if that turned out to be acceptable, Libranet would go opensource.

Being a former Libranet employee, I knew how much time and energy goes into building a full release. Since OpenLibranet would be volunteer work, the team backing it would have to work long nights for at least half a year to make a release. That was too much of an investment if in the end the whole deal can fail.

We then agreed to let it rest. But both sides did their best to free Libranet.

Now Libranet is nothing but a very good memory, and no current Debian-distribution comes even close to providing something as user-friendly and extensive as Adminmenu or the Libranet installer. I still cherish my Libranet 3.0 CD set, but unfortunately I lost (removed) my last checkout of our internal Subversion development tree. Would be fun to see how much still builds ;) .

Edited 2010-03-02 16:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[4]: open source?
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 18:41 in reply to "RE[3]: open source?"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Now Libranet is nothing but a very good memory, and no current Debian-distribution comes even close to providing something as user-friendly and extensive as Adminmenu or the Libranet installer. I still cherish my Libranet 3.0 CD set, but unfortunately I lost (removed) my last checkout of our internal Subversion development tree. Would be fun to see how much still builds ;) .


Hi Daniel
I am an old Libranet user (S.1704).
And yet I didn't know what you just told me, thanks ;)
I couldn't agree more that "no current Debian-distribution comes even close to providing something as user-friendly and extensive as Adminmenu or the Libranet installer"
It is really a shame that the community felt that too much work was involved. Unfortunately I am not a dev, but I could have helped in some other way, i.e. translating/promoting the distro (I am very good at that).
I also cherish my Libranet 3.0 CDs and DVD, but unfortunately it does not support my hardware: 1 desktop and 1 laptop, both (almost) bleeding edge.
OTOH I am not very keen on running an OS in a virtual environment.

Reply Parent Score: 2