Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:50 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 5/18/2010 11:10 PM, Nasser Dassi wrote: > > > > If we are talking about CoApp-compiled software, then we should adopt > > the most transparent license. Why? Because we are not usurping > > licensing of the source code; we are simp

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Thanks Nasser, Are we done here? I'd like to get back to some code now. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Nasser Dassi wrote: > Just to bring everyone's attention back to topic, here are the licenses in > question: > > Alphabetical listing of OSI Licenses -- > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/a

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 5/18/2010 11:10 PM, Nasser Dassi wrote: > > If we are talking about CoApp-compiled software, then we should adopt > the most transparent license. Why? Because we are not usurping > licensing of the source code; we are simply re-packaging the source > code... so, broadly speaking, we should pr

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Just to bring everyone's attention back to topic, here are the licenses in question: Alphabetical listing of OSI Licenses -- http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical *"New" BSD* License -- http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php *Apache *License 2.0 -- http://www.opensource.org/

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Seo Sanghyeon wrote: > 2010/5/19 Mark Stone : > > The language in a license is an implementation choice. Stop looking at > > implementation, and ask yourself what do you actually want from a > > license: > > * Do you want to restrict derivative works? > > * Do yo

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

2010/5/19 Mark Stone : > The language in a license is an implementation choice. Stop looking at > implementation, and ask yourself what do you actually want from a > license: > * Do you want to restrict derivative works? > * Do you want to allow commercial bundling? > * Are you concerned about pate

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Andrew have a point : "so that everyone is happy" I would try to think like a final user (a company that develops and sells software), We use Windows and Microsoft (not open source), so maybe if we want to build applications that use CoApp as their foundation, ... we want to use CoApp, modify CoAp

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

> I'm still asking with legitimate interest, what conflict? Can you actually > cite either a lawyer or prominent OSS individual's research on this topic, I meant within our community not in open source in general. It seems some want BSD others want APL. I personally don't care which however I figu

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 5/18/2010 9:54 PM, Andrew Fenn wrote: > Since there is a conflict between APL 2.0 and BSD how about a > compromise. We could use the BSD license and attach a patent clause to > it. Hmmm? I'm still asking with legitimate interest, what conflict? Can you actually cite either a lawyer or promine

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

If you have a concern about the contribution agreement with the CodePlex Foundation, then raise your concern with them and have them pay their lawyers to address it. Having set up the legal processes for the CodePlex Foundation myself, I know that (a) they should be willing to do so, and (b) they h

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Since there is a conflict between APL 2.0 and BSD how about a compromise. We could use the BSD license and attach a patent clause to it. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:56 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 5/18/2010 1:01 PM, Ted Bullock wrote: >> On 18/05/2010 11:58 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >>>

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

I was referring to the actual in-lining, not the code. It'll need to be separated out to a proper .asm file before running through the Microsoft compilers. Not sure if this artificial limitation exists in gcc land, I'm guessing not. /rafael On 5/18/2010 7:54 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 5/

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 5/18/2010 1:01 PM, Ted Bullock wrote: > On 18/05/2010 11:58 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> On 5/18/2010 12:55 PM, Ted Bullock wrote: >>> >>> For instance here is the ISC license, it is small, easy to understand, >>> and I never ever get confused about what my responsibilities are. >>> """ >>>

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On 5/18/2010 3:32 PM, Rivera, Rafael wrote: > Sadly, some of OpenSSL's assembly implementations are inline hacks (e.g. > bignum). This is going to be a pain to port to x64... using Microsoft's > compilers. The x86_64 work is already complete, AFAICT. There is an issue that the team had planned to

Re: [Coapp-developers] Creating Projects in Launchpad.

How does Ubuntu do all of their packages? I don't think they need to all have the co- prefix because by being linked to the CoApp project we know the context of them. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Garrett Serack wrote: > FYI: > > > > I’ve requested the CoApp project be renamed to CoApp-Engin

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

so - both have windows ports that are a bit out of date. I think they would be good targets to coapp-ify -- Sent from my Nokia N900 - Original message - > On 5/18/2010 12:05 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 17:28:48, Henry Rodrick wrote: > > > > > Awesome tip, than

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Agreed. AL 2.0. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:33 AM, Nasser Dassi wrote: > I concur with Garrett's recommendation of AL 2.0. > > The language translates to the same thing with 3 specific exceptions: > > * AL 2.0 is explicitly *no-charge*. > * AL 2.0 is explicitly *irrevocable *(as bold-faced). > * A

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

50k multiplied by how many downloads/packages? ;) On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Garrett Serack > wrote: > > Yes, we'd like to have a tiny bootstrap DLL that gets us the engine DLL, > and the bootstrap can ship in every MSI. > > > > T

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

On Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 19:09:51, Garrett Serack wrote: > No 'tail' tho' ... It's in coreutils. -- < Jernej Simončič ><><><><>< http://eternallybored.org/ > Government corruption is always reported in the past tense. -- The Watergate Principle ___

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

I agree with Mark, we don't need to deal too much with this topics, that is why I encourage new BSD. Patents on software, are we kidding?, this is another intense debate, the Software Patent by their self doesn't have a properly definition, I consider that we don't need to concern about patents,n

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

On Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 19:49:06, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > Unfortunately, those are with unix conventions and tend to barf on win32 data > and paths. unxutils generally handles either convention fairly seamlessly. No, they're native Win32 ports, and expect Win32-style data and paths. --

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

Sadly, some of OpenSSL's assembly implementations are inline hacks (e.g. bignum). This is going to be a pain to port to x64... using Microsoft's compilers. /rafael On 5/18/2010 4:24 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 5/18/2010 2:57 PM, Elizabeth M Smith wrote: > >> I'm not writing assembly -

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On 5/18/2010 2:57 PM, Elizabeth M Smith wrote: > > I'm not writing assembly - however if someone else wants to ;) As a point of reference, two of our first coapp guests, zlib and openssl, profit measurably by using their asm code over the generic C code. One more class of sources for coapp to ju

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On 5/18/2010 1:31 PM, Garrett Serack wrote: If I thought that we were gaining large leaps in productivity for 50k, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with it. But realistically what does C++ buy us that C doesn't? I'm just saying the delta between C and C++ isn't that much (classes, excepti

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Jay R. Wren wrote: > I'd encourage you to realize that this is a strawman point you are making. > > You don't have to be a master mechanic to choose a car. > > You don't have to be a lawyer to choose a license. > Fair enough, but I'd also encourage everyone to no

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

I'd encourage you to realize that this is a strawman point you are making. You don't have to be a master mechanic to choose a car. You don't have to be a lawyer to choose a license. -- Jay On 5/18/2010 2:32 PM, Mark Stone wrote: > Developers arguing choice of license makes about as much sense a

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Mark Stone wrote: > Developers arguing choice of license makes about as much sense as > lawyers arguing choice of programming language. Hahaha, that's a good point. -- Ted Bullock ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

Developers arguing choice of license makes about as much sense as lawyers arguing choice of programming language. Until we are in a position to have real legal counsel, we should use the least restrictive, most permissive, most minimalist license possible so that we give ourselves maximum flexibili

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 18/05/2010 11:58 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 5/18/2010 12:55 PM, Ted Bullock wrote: >> >> For instance here is the ISC license, it is small, easy to understand, >> and I never ever get confused about what my responsibilities are. >> """ >> Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribu

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 5/18/2010 12:55 PM, Ted Bullock wrote: > > For instance here is the ISC license, it is small, easy to understand, > and I never ever get confused about what my responsibilities are. > """ > Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any > purpose with or without fee is

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 18/05/2010 11:31 AM, Roberto Carlos González Flores wrote: > My vote is for BSD License, but I didn't have time to check it, its only > because in most cases I would prefer BSD type Licences than viral Apache > Licenses. But I need to check the new versions. > The Redistribution section of the

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

On 5/18/2010 12:31 PM, Roberto Carlos González Flores wrote: > My vote is for BSD License, but I didn't have time to check it, its only > because in most cases I would prefer BSD type Licences than viral Apache > Licenses. But I need to check the new versions. Explain? AL adds no constraints to t

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

On 5/18/2010 12:05 PM, Jernej Simončič wrote: > On Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 17:28:48, Henry Rodrick wrote: > >> Awesome tip, thanks!! > > Take a look at as > well - it's updated more often than UnxUtils. Unfortunately, those are with unix conventions

Re: [Coapp-developers] Creating Projects in Launchpad.

Good idea, was playing with some PXE boot code today. coapp-pxe? [evil grin] /rafael On 5/18/2010 1:08 PM, Garrett Serack wrote: FYI:   I’ve requested the CoApp project be renamed to CoApp-Engine, and we’re creating a CoApp project group which all our new projects can be c

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Garrett Serack wrote: > If I thought that we were gaining large leaps in productivity for 50k, I > wouldn't have too much of a problem with it. I'm used to C++, I think others are used to C. Having manual string and memory handling isn't my ideal. I'm fine with

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

I concur with Garrett's recommendation of AL 2.0. The language translates to the same thing with 3 specific exceptions: * AL 2.0 is explicitly *no-charge*. * AL 2.0 is explicitly *irrevocable *(as bold-faced). * AL 2.0 includes a *termination *clause. That being said (and IIRC) the MSPL appears

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

If I thought that we were gaining large leaps in productivity for 50k, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with it. But realistically what does C++ buy us that C doesn't? I'm just saying the delta between C and C++ isn't that much (classes, exceptions, templates, overloading) and we're not dy

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

My vote is for BSD License, but I didn't have time to check it, its only because in most cases I would prefer BSD type Licences than viral Apache Licenses. But I need to check the new versions. 2010/5/18 Garrett Serack > The MSPL is great and all… but I think it lacks a bit of expressive > cla

Re: [Coapp-developers] WGet as a case study

I gues that i'm a command line guy too, because i think we need to study wget. 2010/5/18 Mark Stone > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Ted Bullock > wrote> > > > > Hmm, just reading the word wget put me to sleep for a minute. How > > about something cool like Blender for a case study. I cann

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Garrett Serack wrote: > Yes, we'd like to have a tiny bootstrap DLL that gets us the engine DLL, and > the bootstrap can ship in every MSI. > > The bootstrap will be VERY small ( < 2048 bytes ). > > The engine DLL we'd like to keep as small as possible too. Aren'

Re: [Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

The MSPL is great and all... but I think it lacks a bit of expressive clarity: MSPL: "Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licens

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

LOL. No 'tail' tho' ... Still, the gnuwin32 project was one of the first things I was thinking of when I started dreaming up CoApp. g Garrett Serack | Open Source Software Developer | Microsoft Corporation I don't make the software you use; I make the software you use better on Windows. --

[Coapp-developers] Creating Projects in Launchpad.

FYI: I've requested the CoApp project be renamed to CoApp-Engine, and we're creating a CoApp project group which all our new projects can be created under. I anticipate creating projects like "coapp-trace" and "coapp-mkProject" etc... very soon. As for creating the CoApp shallow forks, we coul

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

On Tuesday, May 18, 2010, 17:28:48, Henry Rodrick wrote: > Awesome tip, thanks!! Take a look at as well - it's updated more often than UnxUtils. -- < Jernej Simončič ><><><><>< http://eternallybored.org/ > If you think the problem is bad now, jus

[Coapp-developers] Choice of License.

I've been looking at this carefully, and it boils down to a couple of choices: New BSD (simple, direct, but a bit vague) Or Apache License 2.0. The nice part of the AL is that its language is quite clear about what means what, and specifically what is being granted, whereas the BSD license is

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

Wow! I know that plain ports of some of those tools won't fit perfect into Windows, but damn, some of those tools are hard to live without once you get used to them. Awesome tip, thanks!! On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Garrett Serack wrote: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/unxutils/ > > > > T

Re: [Coapp-developers] WGet as a case study

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Ted Bullock wrote> > > Hmm, just reading the word wget put me to sleep for a minute.  How > about something cool like Blender for a case study.  I cannot imagine > wanting to read a paper about how the wonderful wget ended up on > windows. > Wow. I have exactly t

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

I'm not entirely convinced that we'll need a .NET prototype before Elizabeth manages to get a working C dll out. Since she'll have a several month lead time anyway, (tools to build packages will take a bit of time), it may not be worth it to do the unmanaged version. G Garrett Serack | Open So

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

http://sourceforge.net/projects/unxutils/ There is a tail.exe in there. I use it all the time. Garrett Serack | Open Source Software Developer | Microsoft Corporation I don't make the software you use; I make the software you use better on Windows. From: Henry Rodrick [mailto:moshisu...@gmail

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

Yes, we'd like to have a tiny bootstrap DLL that gets us the engine DLL, and the bootstrap can ship in every MSI. The bootstrap will be VERY small ( < 2048 bytes ). The engine DLL we'd like to keep as small as possible too. Garrett Serack | Open Source Software Developer | Microsoft Corporation

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

On 5/18/2010 3:23 AM, Henry Rodrick wrote: > I still haven't found a good and simple way of doing "tail -f" on > Windows, so I would say that tail is among my top 10 ports :) This (and grep mentioned earlier) falls within the scope of unxutils.sf.net (also wget?), which can be dealt with as a grou

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

Let me try to clear this up. I would prefer C++ as well, but C++ drags in baggage--and potentially a lot of it. Since you need the C++ functions out of MSVCP90/MSVCP100 (either statically linked or dynamically linked) in order to use things like the new operator, exception handling, and pretty

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On 18 May 2010 11:07, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > Obviously our API and ABI will be C. This doesn't mean the > implementation has to be C as well, right? It doesn't *have* to be, but it makes life much easier if it is. Any other choice would see us fighting with the language to achieve our goals

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Elizabeth M Smith wrote: >> C++ can do C bindings as well, can't it? Our bindings should certainly be >> C. >> Doesn't C++ share the other advantages? >> >> Olaf >> > > What?  I mean binding coapp to other higher level languages primarily > written in C.  Perl, Pyt

Re: [Coapp-developers] Code?

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Ted Bullock wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Jonathan Ben-Joseph > wrote: >> This is because C truly is the least common denominator when it comes to >> language binding, almost every mainstream language can call directly into C >> shared libraries witho

Re: [Coapp-developers] What packages do you want to see?

I still haven't found a good and simple way of doing "tail -f" on Windows, so I would say that tail is among my top 10 ports :) ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : coapp-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : http