Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Mark Schonewille wrote: OpenVZ is free open source software, available under GNU GPL. OpenVZ is the basis of Parallels Virtuozzo Containers, a commercial virtualization solution offered by Parallels. OpenVZ project is supported by Parallels. http://wiki.openvz.org/Main_Page I'm not sure that

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Richard: OpenVZ is free open source software, available under GNU GPL. OpenVZ is the basis of Parallels Virtuozzo Containers, a commercial virtualization solution offered by Parallels. OpenVZ project is supported by Parallels. http://wiki.openvz.org/Main_Page I'm not sure that this is the enti

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Mark Schonewille wrote: > The trick is to provide a quality of services that's worth paying > for, including compiled binaries, while at the same time keeping > the open-source community at a big distance away from your commercial > product. You could also try to focus your open-source project on

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Hi, The trick is to provide a quality of services that's worth paying for, including compiled binaries, while at the same time keeping the open-source community at a big distance away from your commercial product. You could also try to focus your open-source project on Unix flavours while focus

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

On Apr 17, 2011, at 7:15 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Peter Brigham wrote: > >> On Apr 15, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: >> >>> Scott McDonald wrote: Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling commercially with not making the source code available.

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Peter Brigham wrote: > On Apr 15, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> Scott McDonald wrote: >>> Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling >>> commercially with not making the source code available. >>> >>> But of course, they are not the same thing. >> >> Not ex

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Hi all, > On Apr 15, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: >> Scott McDonald wrote: >>> Thanks Mark for clarifying that. >>> Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling >>> commercially with not making the source code available. >>> But of course, they are not the same thin

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

On Apr 15, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Scott McDonald wrote: > >> Thanks Mark for clarifying that. >> >> Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling >> commercially with not making the source code available. >> >> But of course, they are not the same thing. >

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Mark Schonewille wrote: > Don't forget that buying a LiveCode license, which is necessay > to compile any open-source LC stack, might be much more expensive > than paying for compiled open-source software. True, and along those lines it may cost less to simply write the author of a component yo

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Hi Richard, Don't forget that buying a LiveCode license, which is necessay to compile any open-source LC stack, might be much more expensive than paying for compiled open-source software. Im not entirely sure how you define 'free', but your statement regarding free software seems flawed, since

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Mark Schonewille wrote: > On 15 apr 2011, at 16:14, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> Scott McDonald wrote: >>> >>> Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling >>> commercially with not making the source code available. >>> >>> But of course, they are not the same thing. >> >> Not e

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

On 04/16/2011 01:27 PM, Mark Schonewille wrote: Richard, You'd be surprised how many don't know how to milk a cow Having milked a cow by hand, and had the beast kick me in the stomach, I would advise one and all to avoid the experience at all costs. or wouldn't bother doing so because it i

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Richard, You'd be surprised how many don't know how to milk a cow or wouldn't bother doing so because it is so much easier to buy the milk in the supermarket. I, for one, could get a cow for free, but I have no place for it on my balcony. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consu

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

The last time I looked at the fine print was when Version 3 of the GPL was being debated/coming out, and I was then an avid "Linux Format" reader, but that was a while ago now. Assuming what you say is correct, then that's good to know. >The ramifications of this are that if the GPL license allow

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Thanks Scott, and as I understand it, "links" means that you compile an app that links to the GPL library so the two in effect become one codebase. With LiveCode, your compiled app would have no "linkage" to the GPL library, but would be distributed alongside it, and the communication would occu

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Scott McDonald wrote: Thanks Mark for clarifying that. Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling commercially with not making the source code available. But of course, they are not the same thing. Not exactly the same, but how many people pay for milk when they can get

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Thanks Mark for clarifying that. Where I was getting it mixed up, was that I was equating selling commercially with not making the source code available. But of course, they are not the same thing. Cheers, - -- Scott McDonald "Components, Controls, Tools and Resources for LiveCode" www.ru

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Hi, I know that this is not true. Under GPL, you can ALWAYS sell your software commercially, but if you do, you have to *offer* the source code as well. When you *offer* the source code, the buyer can decide to have *no interest* in the source code, which means that in some cases you may be dis

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

I looked into this a while back and my understanding was: * If you link to a library released under the GPL terms, then you cannot sell your product commercially. * But if the library is released under the LGPL terms (which are different), then it is OK to sell your product commercially. * If yo

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

This might give you some ideas http://qery.us/pb Thanks! In which way is your project going to be delivered to your customers? Is your project going to be distributed commercially? Our project with be delivered via download, and it will be distributed comm

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Chip Thomas wrote: I am wondering if anyone on this list has shipped a Rev/Livecode project that communicated with a code library released under the GPL license, and if so, your reasons for making your LiveCode project GPL or non-GPL. The GPL license is clear that it is possible to have closed

Re: Rev/Livecode project and GPL Licenses

Hi Thomas, This might give you some ideas http://qery.us/pb In which way is your project going to be delivered to your customers? Is your project going to be distributed commercially? -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering Homepage: http://economy