Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:50 AM, James Feeney wrote: > > OpenLEDE I do agree that a more distinct name change than "lede" is needed for the added googlejuice. To me though the openthis, openthat, libretheotherthing meme has got kind of old in recent years, although it does seem to end up hinting

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

OpenLEDE The name both combines the project names and conveys that sense of greater transparency that was, in part, the purpose of the LEDE project. ___ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 08:28:25AM +0100, John Crispin wrote: > On 27/12/2016 08:08, David Lang wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:31 PM, John Crispin wrote: > >>> i am still very much in favour of having 2 trees, one stable and one dev > >>> tree. t

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

So I can;t find the exact mail I was going to reply to a few days ago (WH does the android gmail client force send html...) so I'm nuking all context. Sorry. I have been quite happy with the LEDE name change. I'm been a OpenWRT user since before WR. I will be the first to agree that the na

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 27/12/2016 08:08, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:31 PM, John Crispin wrote: >>> >> [..] >>> i am still very much in favour of having 2 trees, one stable and one dev >>> tree. this would allow everyone to choose what they think fits

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:31 PM, John Crispin wrote: [..] i am still very much in favour of having 2 trees, one stable and one dev tree. this would allow everyone to choose what they think fits their needs best. I too have liked this idea since I f

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:31 PM, John Crispin wrote: > [..] > i am still very much in favour of having 2 trees, one stable and one dev > tree. this would allow everyone to choose what they think fits their > needs best. I too have liked this idea since I first heard it. Upstream Wi-Fi has a "wir

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Dec 21, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Russell Senior wrote: >> "Florian" == Florian Fainelli writes: > >>> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name >>> change may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of >>> the project, a reboot, especially if the new name ri

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 12/22/2016 12:27 AM, John Crispin wrote: > or do we want to build a "one stop shop" for embedded linux Yes, we do? When I read that, my gut reaction was "Oh yeah - embedded linux." I remember, when I first heard about "LEDE", as distinct from OpenWRT, I was attracted to the broader focus on

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 19:57, Giuseppe Lippolis wrote: we did propose this as an idea, keep lede as the bleeding edge tree and >>> use openwrt as the stable release tree with long term support. the openwrt >>> folks made it a condition for the merger that this may not be the case.

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

> >> we did propose this as an idea, keep lede as the bleeding edge tree > >> and > > use > >> openwrt as the stable release tree with long term support. the > >> openwrt > > folks > >> made it a condition for the merger that this may not be the case. i > >> think > > the > >> sentence used by the

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 19:00, Giuseppe Lippolis wrote: >>> When I decided where to port my contribution I considered the "focus >>> on stability and functionality" more interesting than the "bleeding >>> edge functionality", therefore I selected LEDE. >>> Now I understand that a merge is ongoing. >>> Ca

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

> > When I decided where to port my contribution I considered the "focus > > on stability and functionality" more interesting than the "bleeding > > edge functionality", therefore I selected LEDE. > > Now I understand that a merge is ongoing. > > Can I ask to the people taking care about the merg

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

Nevertheless, wouldn’t it be wise to ask SPI to also handle trademark issues around the name lede(-project) ? Irrespective of the outcome of this discussion about which name to use when the projects would be merged, having some protection around the name seems wise and SPI exists for that very

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 09:58, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: > >> On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: >>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: >>> > Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, > but Deb and Ian aren't involved with De

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some point the fact that a name is k

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: > >>> Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, >>> but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some >>> point the fact that a name is known matters far more than t

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical reasons for the name. a problem that ca

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 09:40, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the >> brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or >> OpenOffice->LibreOffice. > > I would point at OpenOffice ->

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 09:36, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: >>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the pro

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote: - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or OpenOffice->LibreOffice. I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes. David Lang

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be cosmetic (web site, etc.)

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 09:25, James Feeney wrote: > > On 12/22/2016 12:27 AM, John Crispin wrote: >> or do we want to build a "one stop shop" for embedded linux > > Yes, we do? ! [...] > Consider: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_single-board_computers > > Does LEDE have builds for all

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 08:24, Giuseppe Lippolis wrote: > Dear All, > I started to contribute to LEDE recently and after the spin-off. > When I decided where to port my contribution I considered the "focus on > stability and functionality" more interesting than the "bleeding edge > functionality", therefor

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 08:06, Russell Senior wrote: >> "Val" == Val Kulkov writes: > >>> Not that a choice on a name, with taste and discretion, isn't going >>> to be needed, but I can't help but think of this: >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality >>> >>> >>> PS: OpenLEDE. ;-) >

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

Dear All, I started to contribute to LEDE recently and after the spin-off. When I decided where to port my contribution I considered the "focus on stability and functionality" more interesting than the "bleeding edge functionality", therefore I selected LEDE. Now I understand that a merge is ongoin

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

OpenLEDE - /ˈōpənlēdē/ On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Russell Senior wrote: > > Val> Now, please try to explain how to pronounce OpenLEDE and make sure > Val> the correct pronunciation sticks :-) > > It doesn't matter how they pronounce it, as long as they can find the > IRC channel ;-) > >

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 04:45, Dave Taht wrote: > Lede trademark... > > Published for Opposition:December 20, 2016 > > sigh. > *slap on the wrist or top posting* the project is called lede-project and not lede for a reason ;) John > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Val Kulkov wrote: >> On 2

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22/12/2016 06:18, Val Kulkov wrote: > On 22 December 2016 at 00:13, Russell Senior > wrote: >>> "Florian" == Florian Fainelli writes: >> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name change may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of the

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

> "Val" == Val Kulkov writes: >> Not that a choice on a name, with taste and discretion, isn't going >> to be needed, but I can't help but think of this: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality >> >> >> PS: OpenLEDE. ;-) Val> Now, please try to explain how to pronounce OpenL

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 22 December 2016 at 00:13, Russell Senior wrote: >> "Florian" == Florian Fainelli writes: > >>> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name >>> change may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of >>> the project, a reboot, especially if the new name rides

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

> "Florian" == Florian Fainelli writes: >> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name >> change may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of >> the project, a reboot, especially if the new name rides on the >> popularity of "OpenWRT". It could be for exampl

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

> OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge, > sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt > and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. I seem to agree with this -- As a user, I have been using Tomato and DD-WRT until very recently, exactly because I tried OpenWRT

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

Lede trademark... Published for Opposition:December 20, 2016 sigh. On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Val Kulkov wrote: > On 21 December 2016 at 17:01, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote: >>> On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 a

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 21 December 2016 at 17:01, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote: >> On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: > From a PR perspective, I strongly sugges

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 12/21/2016 07:30 PM, Val Kulkov wrote: > > On 21 December 2016 at 17:01, Florian Fainelli > wrote: > > On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote: > > On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote: > On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: >>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: >> >>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as >>> part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be >>> cosmetic

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: > >> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as >> part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be >> cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much histo

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

Hi all, To clarify, the reason for integrating the OpenWrt patches into the LEDE tree is that in the future, at an agreed point in time for both parties, the OpenWrt trunk would be rebased from the LEDE tree, giving the community a "clean" trunk going forward. (Hopefully at that time, the "t

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

Great achievement. Congratulations to all involved. On the naming topic have in mind the weight OpenWRT has given its history in all these years. I personally think this point is the easiest. Given the agreements continue hopefully there will be a single one great project again soon with all bene

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems > between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible > merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core > developers were invited to these meet