DonationCoder.com Software > Circle Dock

Goodbye all, I'm out of here effective immediately

<< < (11/16) > >>

JavaJones:
Wow. This thread was making me really sad most of the way through (until Markham's latest reply). Still I know 2 things: DC and its members are not evil, and Markham and Steve are not evil. There are issues on both sides here and it has really just been amplified beyond reality (IMHO) and spiralled out of control.

Markham, it sounds like you've found a way forward and I'm very happy to hear that. I have never been a CD user, and may never be, but I found you and Steve's enthusiasm for the project infectious and loved having you as a part of the DC community. I hope you will continue to be a part of it, regardless of what product(s) you may be working on. I wish you the best of success on everything.

Lastly, I want to make a brief, general, and probably not entirely welcome comment on the GPL. This the 2nd time I have seen a major meltdown occur over GPL issues, and as I am not a part of that world very much, I can only assume this happens much more often. I do not think the GPL license itself is fundamentally bad or "evil", but I do think many people do not consider all its legal consequences when they get involved (in any sense) with GPL'd products. The simple fact is that as a software license it inherently has serious legal implications and that fact alone makes it beyond the easy understanding of most average people. The complexities of the case we have here illustrate that very well. Even if the license itself is comparatively simple, and the consequences of that license "simple" in a glib recitation of its effects, the ultimate consequences when applied in practice can be all too complicated and *chilling*. It is that chilling effect which bothers me...

That being the reality, while I don't find the GPL to be fundamentally bad, incidents like this make me like it less and less. The other major incident I am referring to is the whole Joomla debacle, which now means my favorite forum software SMF - the same one used here - cannot easily integrated with Joomla because of incompatible licenses.

So, did people here abuse the GPL? Yes. Is that legally wrong? Yes. Was there bad intention behind any of their actions? Not that I can see. So what is "right" here? Is it vital to ensure that the legal mandate of the GPL is upheld? That seems a small issue to me. A legitimate one, but a small one. I wouldn't ask that anyone not exercise their legal rights under the license, but I do think it's important to consider the relative importance of issues here with the topic at hand, and while a legal issue could be considered to trump all personal and emotional ones, quite honestly I value the community here, its integrity, and its contributors (of which Markham and Steve are both significant ones) far beyond any non-malicious license breaches. I hope within this community that mutual respect and understanding is something that we all hold among our highest values.

- Oshyan

Eóin:
There is, however, a caveat: Eric Wong's source archive (and binaries) does contain proprietary (non-GPL) units (DLLs) for which source code is not (and can not) be provided.
--- End quote ---

Ironically then Eric's code was in GPL violation as well. That technically means even his binaries can't be distributed. Ah the joys of the GPL :) Mark, removing the remaining GPL parts is a great idea, good luck.

Markham:
There is, however, a caveat: Eric Wong's source archive (and binaries) does contain proprietary (non-GPL) units (DLLs) for which source code is not (and can not) be provided.
--- End quote ---

Ironically then Eric's code was in GPL violation as well. That technically means even his binaries can't be distributed. Ah the joys of the GPL :) Mark, removing the remaining GPL parts is a great idea, good luck.
-Eóin (August 13, 2010, 04:58 AM)
--- End quote ---

Actually, I don't believe that is the case. Much would depend on the wording of the particular non-GPL licences - many will permit their binaries to be distributed in both commercial and non-commercial works. But he certainly would be prevented from distributing their source code. When I took the project over, I wasn't at all happy about the inclusion of those binaries - for which no contact info or licences were provided - and took steps to remove them. That meant rewriting a vast amount of code and something I won't have the time to do again.

However the GPL purists here may insist that full source code be provided, since technically the license does provide for that. If they do, we will have no option but to close the whole GPL project, since we would be unable to comply. It could, however, be re-licenced under the MS-PL which does not require full source code to be distributed (and is the licence Eric Wong should have used IMO), but that may not appeal to App103 or Gothic.

Let's see how they react.




Mark

Markham:
Markham, it sounds like you've found a way forward and I'm very happy to hear that. I have never been a CD user, and may never be, but I found you and Steve's enthusiasm for the project infectious and loved having you as a part of the DC community. I hope you will continue to be a part of it, regardless of what product(s) you may be working on. I wish you the best of success on everything.-JavaJones (August 13, 2010, 02:12 AM)
--- End quote ---

Thank you!

By the way, who is Steve? :D I think you mean the Sarge ("sgtevmckay") but his name is not Steve! :)



Mark

40hz:
However the GPL purists here may insist that full source code be provided, since technically the license does provide for that.
-Markham (August 13, 2010, 05:38 AM)
--- End quote ---

Umm...just a minor point regarding access to underlying source code under the GPL...

The license does not merely "technically" provide for that. Nor does it have anything to do with being a "GPL purist." (Whatever that means.  ;D)

Requiring complete, free, and unrestricted access to source code is at the very core of what the GPL and the FSF is all about. That is its raison d'être if you will.

Just wanted to point that out.  ;)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page