[squeak-dev] Re: [ANN] Kernel methods license audit

Pavel Krivanek squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz
Thu Mar 20 16:56:01 UTC 2008

On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu.org> wrote:
>  > - one will look at old and current implementation and will describe
>  > how must be the original source changed to do the same job as the
>  > current version. This description should be as general as possible -
>  > no code. For example "use ZeroDivide instead of general error",
>  > "LdInstLong was renamed to LoadLong" etc. Some descriptions are
>  > present in the old version of license audit
>  > (http://comtalk.eu/public/pub/KernelImage/license/license2.ods)
>  This is great work.  But, how is an accessor copyrightable?  In your pdf
>  I see methods like
>  sourceForm
>      ^sourceForm
>  paleBlue
>      ^PaleBlue
>  e
>      ^E
>  isFloat
>      ^true
>  one
>      "A comment that is probably obsolete by now."
>      ^1.0
>  These are clearly not possible to write differently; and it would be as
>  worse to rewrite the same code "stealing" attribution from the original
>  author, as it is to change the distribution license under the feet of
>  someone who hasn't assigned copyright papers.  It is clearly a stalemate
>  here unfortunately and it has to be sorted out asap.

Most of this simple accessors and testers are already relicensed by
Damien. He simply got the class name, the selector and the information
that this method should be accessor/tester/accessor of something. Then
he wrote the new code that probably has the same content as the
original one.

>  > - the second person/team must not see the current code!
>  In theory they shouldn't even look at the PDF you linked...

right, and never open Squeak, of course :-) But to be more serious, we
simply have to trust people that they will not cheat. And they should
be ready to sign it.

-- Pavel

>  Paolo

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list