Re: .il code/file questions
Pete Lomax wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:29:46 -0800, Robert Craig
> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>
> >Probably not, though I don't completely understand your point.
> The point is the words that you use, not that you necessarily offer
> anything radically different. Please correct me if I am wrong:
>
> The new eu.ex is open source. I can modify it and distribute it as I
> please (but it's a tad slow).
Yes. In fact it's more than just "open source". For example,
the popular GNU license forces you to make your changes open.
This PD source has no restrictions like that. You can make an
open or closed source and/or commercial program
and sell it for a million dollars.
> Assuming I don't modify execute.e, then if I purchase the source, it's
> a simple thing to create a full-featured (bar legacy shrouded code
> support), full speed interpreter (say myexw.exe).
Yes, for private use, not wide distribution.
I can imagine some company needing/wanting to make
a small change to Euphoria. This would allow them
to do so, possibly saving thousands of dollars of
effort for $79.
Most (90%?) of the people who previously purchased
the source product had no intention of widely distributing modified
versions of Euphoria. Obviously, on this mailing list there
are several people with the publicly-stated intention,
and past history, of trying to develop Euphoria-like languages
regardless of the effect that has on RDS's bottom line.
...I know, I know, you all want the best for Euphoria.
You want to selflessly lead the Euphoria community to
the "promised land". You don't want to put RDS out of business.
You just want to clone Euphoria and distribute it free,
at full speed, with open source, to all comers. 
> I can send myexw.exe to you, and it will or will not appear in the
> archive at your discretion.
Yes. If it provides some benefit to those who are using *Euphoria*,
I'll probably post it.
> Now, despite having purchased the source, I'm still at liberty to
> distribute the PD bits I modified, but not myexw.exe (which is the
> main change to the 2.5 license)
Yes you can distribute the PD stuff.
> I am allowed to tell people where to buy the source.
> I can supply instructions for recreating myexw.exe, or, if someone can
> prove they have purchased the source, I can send them myexw.exe.
>
> As I re-read the new source license, it dawns upon me that maybe this
> is what you meant all along.
>
> It all now seems a lot more reasonable to me.
>
> You just want your $79 from every person in the chain, and then we can
> do what we like. Sounds fair play to me.
Yes, you can work with others on the source and you can
give your version of Euphoria to others, e.g. people
who have contracted with you to do a special app,
but everyone must pay $79 for a source license.
> One last thing, before anyone jumps on me. If you create an
> application as opposed to an interpreter, the end users do not have to
> pay a fee, though you may have to distribute it bound because of the
> restriction on redistributing myexw.exe (if, that is, it uses any new
> language features you have devised)
I don't think that's spelled out explicitly,
but the license does not say you can distribute
executables in bound or packaged form without the $79/person rule
kicking in. Nor does it say you can build/distribute something
other than an interpreter and avoid the $79 rule.
Of course the rules are completely different if you
want to port Euphoria to a new platform that it
doesn't already run on.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
