Hi Alan,

It seems that I am first one who won't complain but congratulate you for 
your work, which I think is important one for a Smalltalk community as a 
whole!

Smalltalkers need to learn to give credit to those who deserve, give a 
credit first and then complain! We need to encourage such a work, not 
press it down but complaining. A healthy criticism is of course needed 
too, but it should be such, a healthy and encouraging one!

These were just my few thoughts ..

Keep going on!
Janko

Alan Lovejoy wrote:
> stéphane:
> 
> 1. Hernan Wilkinson: No fair pointing me at Hernan's work when a Google
> search turns up nothing--especially since there's no way I can travel from
> California to Europe any time soon.  So tell me more.
> 
> 2. The Chronos License: In case no one's noticed, the current version of the
> license also forbids any commercial use.  Of course, I'll be removing that
> restriction once I've completed the documentation, implemented leap seconds,
> and completed a final beta period.  ETA of Release 1.0 is no later than the
> end of the year (hey, I have a full time job that doesn't involve Smalltalk
> coding.)
> 
> When Release 1.0 is published, I will be revising the license.  The revision
> will certainly remove the restriction against commercial use, but there's no
> reason I couldn't make other changes also at that time, should I become
> convinced that I should do so.  What I'm trying to say is that there's time
> for those of you who strongly object to the "no porting outside of
> Smalltalk" clause to convince me to change my mind.
> 
> However, at this point I've heard from exactly four people who possibly
> object. One of them recently wrote me for permission to port to a particular
> non-Smalltalk programming language--which I have granted in writing (the
> letter's in the mail as of today.) Whether that addresses his objection or
> not he hasn't said.  I'm counting Howard Stearns as one of the four,
> although all he said was  "You may have trademark issues in addition to the
> license controversy," which doesn't actually make his opinion on the matter
> explicit.  So perhaps there are only two people who object: Andreas Raab and
> Stéphane Ducasse.
> 
> Nevertheless, I feel the objections raise significant issues that deserve
> further discussion--and I don't mean just in the context of Chronos. The
> issues are much larger than that.  I don't want any such discussion to focus
> on Chronos per se--partly because it deserves to be a generic discussion,
> and partly because I'm really trying to avoid overly publicizing Chronos at
> this time (it's not done yet.) At this time, I'd prefer that Chronos only be
> seriously used by those for whom date/time computations are of high
> interest--and even then, only for purposes of evaluation. That's why my
> initial post said it was a "low key announcement."
> 
> So, given the subject of this thread, I'm going to close without saying
> anything further right now, but will post a new topic where the general
> licensing issues can be discussed (although not today--I have other business
> that must be attended to.)  Of course, others are welcome to start such a
> topic on their own, should they be so inclined.
> 
> --Alan
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of stéphane
> ducasse
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 2:10 AM
> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> Subject: Re: Chronos
> 
> But alan
> 
> why do not you provide it as MIT and you can still port it to Java
> and sell it? I know that this is naive but
> when I see the hell of the licenses around and got systematically
> bitten by it.
> I think that in squeak we should have MIT and Squeak-L: look at
> Squeaksource, smallwiki, seaside, croquet, tweak.....
> the new network rewrite, compiler....will all be like that. Else I
> think that people should not really use your package.
> 
> By the way you will be interested by the forthcoming talk at esug
> about another time package developed by hernan wilkinson.
> It seems that their package will be open too, so may be it would be
> good to see how to produce the best of your packages.
> Or at least have a look.
> 
> Stef
> 
> On 20 juil. 05, at 4:05, Alan Lovejoy wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>>Brian Rice [water at tunes.org] napical:
>>
>>
>>>Eek! That means I can't port it to Slate (http://slate.tunes.org/).
>>>What's the point of that?
>>>
>>
>>
>>>On Jul 19, 2005, at 5:06 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>>>Looks interesting, but I sure hope you'll get your licensing terms
>>>in order. In particular this:
>>>
>>>    "4. You must agree not to port or translate Chronos into any
>>>programming language whose syntax, semantics and computational
>>>model are not substantially compliant to the ANSI Smalltalk
>>>Language Specification.  Porting Chronos to non-Smalltalk
>>>programming languages is strictly prohibited.  However, you are
>>>welcome to enter into negotiations with the copyright owner for
>>>permission to port Chronos to non-Smalltalk programming languages.
>>>In some cases, permission may be granted at no cost or other
>>>encumberance."
>>>
>>>Unless you are trying to find out whether anyone actually reads the
>>>license (in which case you've earned yourself a pat on the back for
>>>adding a really creative little clause to your license ;-) I think
>>>you should seriously rethink the attitude express by this clause.
>>>Surely you realize that niche languages like Smalltalk would be
>>>hurt more than other systems if everybody would pick up this
>>>attitude and have do-not-port-to-languages-i-don't-like clauses.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>  - Andreas
>>>
>>
>>Calm down guys.
>>
>>Firstly, permit me to call your attention to the following two
>>sentences of
>>the license:
>>
>>"However, you are welcome to enter into negotiations with the
>>copyright
>>owner for  permission to port Chronos to non-Smalltalk programming
>>languages.  In some cases, permission may be granted at no cost or
>>other
>>encumberance."
>>
>>Of course, the license says nothing that specifies the basis on
>>which I
>>would decide whether or not to grant permission to port.  So let me
>>state it
>>here:  Although Andreas is partially correct that one of my
>>motivations is
>>to deny the functionality of Chronos to be ported to certain other
>>languages
>>because of my partisan dislike of the languages preferred by the
>>Curly-Braced Horde, that's not the primary motivation.  The primary
>>motivation is money.  I want to preserve my right to port Chronos to a
>>widely-used language (e.g., Java) and sell it for money.  That
>>motivation is
>>not operative in the case of languages such as Slate, Self or
>>Haskell, and
>>so I would grant permission for a port to such languages without
>>hesitation.
>>
>>However, because I want to be able to say that no one has
>>permission to port
>>who was not given such permission in writing, you must obtain written
>>permission.  If Brian is serious about porting Chronos to Slate, he
>>should
>>send me his contact details, and I will send him porting permission in
>>writing.
>>
>>--Alan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Janko Mivšek
Svetovalec za informatiko
EraNova d.o.o.
Ljubljana, Slovenija
www.eranova.si
tel: 01 514 22 55
gsm: 031 674 565