Hi janko :)

On 22 juil. 05, at 14:03, Janko Mivšek wrote:

> Hi Stef!
>
> It was not my intention to argue about license where you are right  
> and I agree completely. I wanted to stress the importance of giving  
> a clearly spoken credit first to someone who make something  
> usefull. After that complaining can come too. This way author will  
> be encouraged to continue with work and more carefully listen to  
> complains, otherwise many people will just say that it isn't worth  
> all the troubles.

of course!!!


Stef
>
> Best regards
> JAnko
>
> stéphane ducasse wrote:
>
>> Janko
>> this is not my point.
>> My point is tthat if we have a proliferation of license we are DEAD.
>> Already with Squeak-L this is DIFFICULT to get accepted  
>> elsewhere.  Believe me I spent hours argumenting.
>> Stef
>> On 21 juil. 05, at 11:19, Janko Mivšek wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>