Talk:Ion (window manager)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry about the confusion in the history. I thought maybe it would be a candidate for speedy deletion, but upon reading further I decided it should just be a copyvio. Timc 02:09, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have written a stub on the new temporary page.Tim Ivorson 15:34, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Ion4 / future

[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.139.161.106 (talk) 07:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Desktop Enviroment?

What Desktop Enviroment Ion uses? can anyone add this piece of information?

Most ion users won't use one. Except on floating workspaces there is never a desktop visible for the usual icon clutter. As with any window manager you can optionally run applications that come with (eg) Gnome or KDE. Recent versions of ion have their own application menu and a window-maker dock, but most ion users probably prefer using the commandline.

[edit] Misrepresentation of Arch Controversy

The text says that Tuomo threatened to sue, however the linked mailing list post mentions only that "there may be legal repercussions". Surely the two are not always the same?

I'm also not sure if his opinion on open source software or his intentions to leave are relevant to the controversy itself, much less the Ion3 window manager.

It's possible the section needs some expanding as well. Tuomo Valkonen's primary claim was that distributing ion3 with third party patches named as if it was the official ion3 was infringing his trademark. Many people confused this with other legal issues such as copyright violation. This, in combination with several flame wars on various mailing lists, has resulted in ion3 being removed from some distrobutions, rather than renamed which was all that was required.

If someone thinks something similar to the above has a place on the main page I can have a crack at writing a section with references. Nigel McNie 13:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree - Tuomo's threats and aggravations, against distributors and other things, were rather vague and hand-wavy (if very intense), less pointed than this suggests.

Then again, at the moment this is a rather polite way of saying Tuomo is nuts, which I think can be inferred from any reading of the ion mailing list. --68.212.72.30 02:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

He's also claimed "license violations" in NetBSD's pkgsrc because the package was out of date. [2]. The general reaction seems to be "delete it entirely; it's not worth his hassle." --moof 08:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opinions

I must first say, I dont like his Ego. BUT whatever is written in a mailling list by him should recieve LESS PRIORITY than REAL ACTIONS. So far, Ion is still open source and before he *really* changes this approach, this article here should NOT HINT at it. Because, hinting at something which does NOT happen, is pure speculation guys! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.103.172 (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, let me first of all just say that I did talk to the author personally and the view presented on this Wikipedia article are indeed not his intentions. However, the posts in question could at least be interpreted as him intending to close the source after the final release of version 3, which would've been perfecly consistent with his actions so far so talking about actions here are meaningless. Debolaz 11:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
And even if his actions are different than his words it would be more consistent with wikipedia to publish the inconsistencies than to remove the cited letters that are yet disputed as coming from the author. Censoring the article for the hope that the author forgets what he wrote, or so as to let this blow off, seems to go against WP:CENSOR. EvanCarroll 03:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Use the google: http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=69724#69724

"Or I could make it closed source, but I thought Ion3 would be my final gift to the FOSS herd, that it can never hope to repay. After that I'll be sticking to writing closed source -- perhaps for Windows. The FOSS herd simply isn't worth my work."

—Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNewLayoutSucks (talk • contribs) 09:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License

The license is listed as LGPL. This is blatantly incorrect. It is a modified version of it which is no-longer free and no longer FSF or OSI approved. Older version of ion were LGPL and not-proprietary but now Ion is using a license which is not an open-source license (OSI's trademark). I'm just not sure what to say the license it, saying it is a custom-LGPL gives the impression it is open-source when in fact it is a proprietary license with the source available. --SingleIssueComplainer (talk) 22:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)