Re: Re: Vancouver Prothon talk

Mark Hahn wrote:

...

> I will remove the name stackless from the heading.  How about if I add a
> line item saying "Will be ported from Christian Tismer's Stackless".
> This will both say that it is not done yet and will make the
> relationship to your Stackless clear.  It will also make it clear you
> own the stackless name.

Please take my apologies for reacting that harsh.
I have experienced abuse way too many times. I
could name you too many doctors and professors
who just failed to account for who actually found
their algorithm. This is why I don't work as an
employee any longer since many years now.

I'm pretty sure that my reaction was not adequate
this time. But I had to let my first impression
go out and complain. Hopefully without any damage.

> Even if your lines of code get mangled beyond recognition in my Prothon,
> I still consider this a port because I will be going through your code
> and learning everything from it and from you and your five years.  I
> will be able to bring up my version very fast because of all your hard
> work.

This just fine with me.

> As I told you before, I was going to give you the credit for this and
> tell everyone that I was stealing you techniques and your code, which is
> the truth.  I thought since I was stealing your code you'd have no
> problem stealing the name.  

You are not stealing my code and experience, it is a gift.
I'm happy that things can live in something real in the
future. I just recognized that the name "Stackless"
reflects my never-ending fight with reality, and that by
implementing stackles features, the stackless problem
(aka turning Python into the real thing) is not achieved at
all. I think this si the implied perception which made me
jeallous.

> The reason I put the presentation up on the web is exactly so that you
> and everyone can see it first so that we can resolve problems like this.
> I will change it until you are totally happy.

I will no iterate this. I was astonished by my own reaction.
You too, probably. This is ok. It was necessary.

...

> You tell your stomach that I will make it ok.  It would be very stupid
> of me to piss off the person who has the technology that I need. :-)

No, that's not the problem, after I'm re-thinking it.
I believe my problem is that I want to stay the devil
in the corner who can claim how dumb the Python implementation
is. I really don't think that Stackless technology is really
outstanding, taken alone. It is, in the context of the
eternal fight against the "wrong implementation".
Probably this is my claim.
The technology is basically simple, without those constraints.
And it is by no means unique, but old technology.

I have to say I was astonished as well of my sudden eruption.
There is something that is afraid from being taken away.
It cannot be the source, since I made it free from the
beginning. I think I'm afraid of my position.

Yes. Probably it is the "advocatus diaboli" which I want to be.
The name "Stackless" seems to reflect all of this, the eternal
fight, the never-ending maintenance against new versions, the
big disappointment. I think my problem is that I cannot accept
anybody taking all these assets over by naming things "Stackless".

Anyway, I'm happy with your reaction.
Please go ahead, this will be a nice talk.
Life is a huge therapy.

sincerely -- chris

-- 
Christian Tismer             :^)   <mailto:[email protected]>
Mission Impossible 5oftware  :     Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a     :    *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin                 :     PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34  home +49 30 802 86 56  mobile +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04       9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619  305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
      whom do you want to sponsor today?   http://www.stackless.com/