On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 03:10:22AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:> That spec is being superceded by: > > http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM2The project has been forked, not superceded. Work on OggPCM is continuing, the team working on OggPCM2 is free to submit their own draft but some are not welcome to continue work on OggPCM due to their recent social conduct. I'm requesting that the team working on OggPCM2 rename their project to avoid confusion, prehaps to the four letter "WAVE" which would fill the first 32-bits as codec magic. Neither team has produced a "release canidate" draft up for approval by Xiph as a whole, so both can be considered parrellel projects. -- The recognition of individual possibility, to allow each to be what she and he can be, rests inherently upon the availability of knowledge; The perpetuation of ignorance is the beginning of slavery. from "Die Gedanken Sind Frei": Free Software and the Struggle for Free Thought by Eben Moglen, General council of the Free Software Foundation
[ NB: This email is to the ogg-dev list only. ] Arc wrote:> On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 03:10:22AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > > That spec is being superceded by: > > > > http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM2 > > The project has been forked, not superceded. > > Work on OggPCM is continuing, the team working on OggPCM2 is free to submit > their own draft but some are not welcome to continue work on OggPCM due to > their recent social conduct.Thats fine by me. However, I seem to remember that the Xiph commnity works by rough concensus. So, the people working on OggPCM2 are Jean-Marc, Silvia, Conrad, Zen, Mike Smith, John Koleszar and myself. We have had considerable discussion on this issue via email. I am willing to provide the whole set of email (currently over 25 emails) to anyone who thinks that what we are working on is not a work of concensus.> I'm requesting that the team working on OggPCM2 rename their project to avoid > confusion, prehaps to the four letter "WAVE" which would fill the first 32-bits > as codec magic.Excluding the people above working on OggPCM2, who, other than you is working on OggPCM?> Neither team has produced a "release canidate" draft up for approval by Xiph as > a whole, so both can be considered parrellel projects.Your effort seems to be a team of one. The OggPCM2 team has seven members. Which has the highest level of concensus? Erik -- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Erik de Castro Lopo +-----------------------------------------------------------+ "These are the finest moments in (post)modern life, when satire is completly indistinguishable from reality... I usually have to rely on the presidential elections for such dada." -- frenomulax on Jesux a christian Linux distro.
Arc, I always thought of you as a harmless idiot, but I no longer think you are harmless. You are now alone working on the OggPCM because everyone got tired of your power trip (I always thought some power was required to do that). Funnily enough, from the moment people gave up on you, it took only 24 hours to write a much better OggPCM definition than what you had (even though we don't consider it complete yet). How is that possible? Because instead of threatening to ban everyone that disagreed from ogg-dev, everyone just came together, proposed new ideas and (especially) made compromises. On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 13:12 -0800, Arc wrote:> On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 03:10:22AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > > That spec is being superceded by: > > > > http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM2 > > The project has been forked, not superceded.Sorry, but that fork took over now. As I mentioned in the last email, your version needs to be renamed ArcPCM to reflect the fact that it's a mix of Pulse Code Modulation with your ego.> Work on OggPCM is continuing, the team working on OggPCM2 is free to submit > their own draft but some are not welcome to continue work on OggPCM due to > their recent social conduct.First don't worry, as I mentioned before nobody in their right mind wants to see your version anymore. Now, let's talk about recent social conducts since you didn't seem to get the point in my last email. The only person with a social problem here is you. I've seen some of the emails/IRC you sent privately to Zen, Silvia, Conrad where you talk like you're a sort of "master of Xiph". Or perhaps you don't remember /msg'ing me with "<Arc> why are you being an asshole". For those interested in a laugh, the full log is at http://people.xiph.org/~jm/Arc-20051111.txt while the public discussion is at http://people.xiph.org/~jm/xiph20051111.txt> I'm requesting that the team working on OggPCM2 rename their project to avoid > confusion, prehaps to the four letter "WAVE" which would fill the first 32-bits > as codec magic.Is that humor? Come on, I'm sure you can do better.> Neither team has produced a "release canidate" draft up for approval by Xiph as > a whole, so both can be considered parrellel projects."...for approval by Xiph..." so who do you think Xiph is? Xiph is exactly the people that you pissed off. Yes, even though you don't consider them to be in your "inner circle" (no pun intended), Silvia, Zen, Erik (among others) *are* important contributors (directly or indirectly) to Xiph. If someone needed to be excluded from this list it would be you, but I even object to that because that would be discrimination based on brain ownership. As a summary in case it still isn't clear: "please hide under a rock and let us forget about you for a while". Jean-Marc
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:44:43AM +1100, Jean-Marc Valin wrote:> > Sorry, but that fork took over now. As I mentioned in the last email, > your version needs to be renamed ArcPCM to reflect the fact that it's a > mix of Pulse Code Modulation with your ego.No. I started OggPCM, since it was never proposed to Xiph.org it remains my trademark until which time it is accepted by Xiph and by myself for release. It would be similar to me releasing Speex v2.0 - it is not my right, because you used and promoted the name first, and that makes it yours. If I were to fork Speex I would be legally required to change the name of my fork. One thing you have missed, prehaps, is that the purpose of OggPCM is to work with my Ogg convience library, I already have code which uses the earlier draft of OggPCM, and will release my library with or without Xiph in a matter of days. You want to consider me a dangerous threat? View me as enemy? While I don't view myself as such, or you as such, your beliefs to this effect will lead you to great acts of stupidity. This is a uniform truth of people who start viewing their allies as enemies, and I can only hope you're smart enough to see that. To repeat, until which time I have handed the project over, or which time other arragements have happened, I reserve an exclusive trademark on the name. I do not need Xiph approval to release a codec which uses Ogg, if Xiph were to make a decidion otherwise it'd have a chilling effect on further 3rd party contributions to the Ogg framework from outside Xiph. Your disrespect for myself and my contributions have led to this. Just because I suddenly have something shiney that interests you doesn't give you the right to scream "pretty - mine - you too stupid to have" and snatch it. It's theft, blatently so, and you can be damned sure I'm going to be vocal about it even if I don't have enough interest to take it to court. What that leads to for myself, or my further ability to work with Xiph, will be in direct line with how widely your views are shared within the organization. -- The recognition of individual possibility, to allow each to be what she and he can be, rests inherently upon the availability of knowledge; The perpetuation of ignorance is the beginning of slavery. from "Die Gedanken Sind Frei": Free Software and the Struggle for Free Thought by Eben Moglen, General council of the Free Software Foundation