1. License
Rob needs to decide what he wants to do.
Being public-domain doesnt encourage anyone to contribute to the existing
Euphoria project but rather gives them incentive to fork their own Eu for profit
or other and abandom this community.
Serveral community members have expressed their interest for an alternative
lanaguage based on Euphoria. This doesnt help our existing language improve any,
which was Robert's whole plan behind Open Euphoria in the first place.
Regards,
Vincent
2. Re: License
Vincent wrote:
>
> Rob needs to decide what he wants to do.
>
> Being public-domain doesnt encourage anyone to contribute to the existing
> Euphoria
> project but rather gives them incentive to fork their own Eu for profit or
> other
> and abandom this community.
>
> Serveral community members have expressed their interest for an alternative
> lanaguage based on Euphoria. This doesnt help our existing language improve
> any, which was Robert's whole plan behind Open Euphoria in the first place.
>
>
> Regards,
> Vincent
I haven't been following the license debate too closely, so forgive me if I am
repeating points already made.
I think the license should be restricted to the Euphoria language (interpreter,
translator, compiler, whatever) and its derivatives, but should not infect
application programs written using Euphoria. Libraries fall somewhere in between
the two categories, and should probably be covered by the license, since they are
extensions of the language.
I support the idea of an official version of Euphoria, managed by a small
committee.
Regards, Colin
