IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Does it really?
I thought that they forbid open source products with any of a series of licenses that they dislike (including the GPL), but had no objection to, say, the BSD license.

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New I don't remember all the details . . .
. . but I'm pretty certain they won't allow distribution of anything that includes their libraries if you haven't paid for the development product. That would place redistribution encumbrances on the source code which would be non-compliant with the BSD license and pretty much any other open source license.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New The licenses are more forgiving than you think
There is nothing stopping me from writing source-code and distributing the source under a BSD license, no matter what the copyrighted material that the compiled source has to pull in.

Microsoft can choose whether to let me distribute the binary under a BSD license, but the source is OK. (And if I have bought licenses to their development environment for production use, their license normally allows me to compile things for redistribution. After all that is what I was purchasing it for.) Anyone who has not purchased the Microsoft libraries won't be able to compile it, but the BSD license insists on nothing like that. Heck, even the GPL would be fine with linking with some of their proprietary libraries if it falls under the OS exemption.

This is well-trodden ground. Open source people have worked in proprietary environments for decades and have a well-understood set of compromises to follow.

But the issue was far worse. As I recall, if you agreed to their user agreement, then you couldn't do something as simple as use their editor to edit a piece of existing GPLed C code which you were then going to compile on another platform. Likewise while you could compile anything that you wanted and sell it to your neighbour, you couldn't download a GPLed program, compile it, and then give it to your neighbour.

I'm not sure of the current status of that mess, but I think that they backed away. (Even if they didn't, I don't care, I no longer use Windows for anything.)

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New Really interesting issue
please let me know what you guys find out about it.

I've seen open sourced code that was written to compile under Visual C++ like the GiFT file sharer. I haven't been able to get it to compile, and the VC++ documentation is missing on how to do that, but people on their forum claim they have compiled with VC++ and VC++.Net to get the program to work.

I figure if an open sourced program can be written to use VC++, it also can be made to use VB as well. Unless these guys are violating the ULA that Microsoft has.

I can now see why some open sourced projects actually charge money for Windows ports of the programs.

Thanks.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

     NET SEND to all except a few systems? - (SpiceWare) - (42)
         Send to group -NT - (Silverlock)
         If you send not to machine names, but... - (CRConrad) - (6)
             Re: If you send not to machine names, but... - (deSitter) - (5)
                 "Messenger" != "NET SEND" ? - (CRConrad) - (4)
                     NET SEND Help - (orion)
                     Re: "Messenger" != "NET SEND" ? - (deSitter) - (2)
                         Alternatively... - (pwhysall)
                         So if Darrell's gang use W2K or later, they could try my way -NT - (CRConrad)
         update - (SpiceWare)
         Re: NET SEND to all except a few systems? - (qstephens) - (32)
             ROFL - (deSitter) - (31)
                 It inspires me - (orion) - (30)
                     Re: It inspires me - (deSitter) - (22)
                         On this we agree - (orion)
                         Windows has no user context? - (Arkadiy) - (20)
                             process-level user context - (deSitter) - (19)
                                 I am still at a loss as to what you mean -NT - (Arkadiy) - (18)
                                     A login is a profile - (orion)
                                     Re: I am still at a loss as to what you mean - (deSitter) - (16)
                                         You're much mistaken - (Arkadiy) - (15)
                                             Can you be logged in as two people at once? - (ben_tilly) - (7)
                                                 Not log in, no. - (admin) - (3)
                                                     I'll tuck that away in case I ever need it -NT - (ben_tilly)
                                                     Yes you can and it is a weak security system - (orion) - (1)
                                                         Re: Yes you can and it is a weak security system - (pwhysall)
                                                 Certainly - (Arkadiy) - (2)
                                                     Re: Certainly - (deSitter) - (1)
                                                         You keep hearing yourself, not me - (Arkadiy)
                                             Re: You're much mistaken - (deSitter) - (6)
                                                 What does hiererchy of processes have to do with it? - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                                                     Re: What does hiererchy of processes have to do with it? - (deSitter) - (4)
                                                         I am not sure what NT_AUTHORITY is - (Arkadiy) - (3)
                                                             Except: - (FuManChu) - (2)
                                                                 RIght you are -NT - (Arkadiy)
                                                                 Bottom line - (pwhysall)
                     Careful there . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (5)
                         Does it really? - (ben_tilly) - (3)
                             I don't remember all the details . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                                 The licenses are more forgiving than you think - (ben_tilly) - (1)
                                     Really interesting issue - (orion)
                         Bah! I'll make it freeware then. - (orion)
                     that's what I did - (SpiceWare)

It's like an ee cummings poem written using only the usernames a website suggests when the one you want is taken.
137 ms