Squeak-dev November 2001

squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org

174 participants
374 discussions

RE: What's "Linking" under the GPL?
by Jarvis, Robert P. (Contingent) 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew C. Greenberg [mailto:werdna@mucow.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:05 AM > > On Thursday, November 1, 2001, at 04:00 AM, > goran.hultgren(a)bluefish.se wrote: > > > I do understand your observation but honestly - all these > > comparisons between FSF/GNU/Richard Stallman and Communism/ > > Soviet Union are: > <snip!> > > Well, not to support the analogy, but there is little doubt > that "free software" engineered so you can't do things with > it isn't particularly free. Andrew, Once again you have clearly and rationally stated that which I am too emotional or inarticulate to say myself. Thank you. Bob Jarvis Compuware @ Timken

1 0

RE: What's "Linking" under the GPL?
by goran.hultgren＠bluefish.se 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

Hi Robert and all! (AsbestShield new) wear "Jarvis, Robert P. (Contingent)" <Jarvisb(a)timken.com> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ed Heil [mailto:uncorrected@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:05 AM > > > > I understand that one of the big behind-the-scenes projects that the > > FSF and their lawyers are working on for future versions of the GPL is > > a better and more general set of definitions for the "linking" issue. > > They understand that the license is really written with C in mind and > > gets less and less comprehensible as your programming model departs > > from a Unix/C like programming model, but it's not a problem that has > > an obvious and easy solution. > > It seems to me that the GPL is roughly equivalent to the old Soviet Union > ("Anything not forbidden is mandatory"), while the MIT license is more like > the U.S. ("Do what you want, but don't blame us if you get hurt"). SqueakL > reminds me a bit of socialism ("We're from the government and we're here to > help you"), while most commercial licenses are rather dictatorial ("We are > in control! You have no rights!"). Just an observation... I do understand your observation but honestly - all these comparisons between FSF/GNU/Richard Stallman and Communism/Soviet Union are: 1. Quite boring because we have heard them oh so many times... 2. Often rather unenlightened (not always, but often) 3. Often pure propaganda (see Microsoft trying to pull the EXACT same stunt) 4. IMHO just totally wrong The GPL is engineered on purpose to foster free software in favour of "closed proprietary software" (pick your own words if those sound wrong). SqueakL and MIT are not. I have a question here: What do you dislike about the GPL? (assuming that you do dislike the system of old Soviet Union) Is it the fact that you can't take such code and do what YOU want with it despite what the copyright holder wants? The copyright holder said, by choosing GPL, that he/she doesn't want it to be used in closed proprietary software (distributed that is, inhouse is ok). He she in fact wants to support free software instead by taking this stand. What is so wrong with that? And lastly, there is truly no flame intended with this posting - these things just tend to awaken the "ranter" in me... ;-) This thread is of course rather "impopular" so reply in private if needed! Or just go ahead and post - what the heck, it is better than endless discussions about Kant, right? :-) :-) regards, Göran

2 1

[BUG] TestRunner doesn't work as documented
by Ned Konz 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

I'm using a recent image. According to the class docs, TestRunner runTests and TestRunner runTests: '* test*' should both work. However, both result in walkbacks. The first problem is that the Morph itself doesn't get opened, so you get a walkback because the Morph stuff hasn't been initialized. This can be fixed in runTests and runTests: by making them call open, and making TestRunner class>>open return a TestRunner, not a SystemWindow. Then runTests: is broken further because it calls some methods that don't exist (classPatternFrom: and selectorPatternFrom:). In fact, there are several messages called in TestRunner that aren't implemented: TestRunner>>openAsMorph calls TestRunner>>open TestRunner>>runTests: calls classPattern:, selectorPattern:, classPatternFrom: and selectorPatternFrom: TestRunner>>showResultDefects calls TestRunner>>result TestRunner>>showResultSummary calls TestRunner>>failureMessage -- Ned Konz currently: Stanwood, WA email: ned(a)bike-nomad.com homepage: http://bike-nomad.com

4 4

OOPSLA 2001 trip report
by John M McIntosh 01 Nov '01

01 Nov '01

A bit late, and a bit brief but it's been sleepless here in Tampa. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com/html/OOPSLA2001d1.html

3 2

Jump to page: