OpenEuphoria

Re: Linux Torvalds on GPL2

• Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Sep 27, 2006
• 909 views

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 05:11:33 -0700, Matt Lewis
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:

>In a word, confusing.  Or at least complex.
Yes it does need significant rewording.
(it's not really a "licence" as such either, more a statement of
[hoped-for] behaviour/facts, not sure what else to call it.)
>The prospect of actual open source Euphoria makes positive less attractive to
>me.
<cheesy fake smile>
Tell me about it, I'm near suicidal over it.
</cheesy fake smile>
>The closed-sourceiness of the project is a bit of a turn off.
I half-hope the simplicity of rebuild might counter that.
The bizarre thing is it takes a bit of closed source to /force/ the 
open-sourceiness that I want .
The closed source bit is clearly as turing-complete as the x86
instruction set; in my (blinkered) view, bugs aside, not really
any/much different to pd source that uses eg kernel32.dll.
Feel free to disagree.
>Not that I'm anti-closed source,
>per se, but I'm not personally planning on making any money off of 
>Euphoria, and am more interested in the coding itself.  Open source 
>therefore suits me better, personally.
Fair point. I have to add value and I have to believe I can still do 
so even in the face of this news. I have my work cut out, I know.

All I can plea is that you don't dismiss it out of hand; try it once 
in a while as new versions arrive - at no cost, of course 

I know full well it is not yet ready. It was always a daunting task,
even more so with this sudden body blow. Lastly there are no points
for advising me I am a fool to persist, I now have little choice.
Besides it is better to have a choice not a monopoly, surely.

I suppose one last vestige of hope is that Rob releases the source,
along with instructions on how to install and configure a suitable C
compiler, but continues to sell a pre-built "stable" binary, perhaps
more suited to commercial/total newbie use out-of-the-box.

I dunno, what would people think about a clause in the licence along
the lines of:
"you can give (or sell) a binary to anybody, just don't advertise it 
[on EUforum or any pages directly linked from rapideuphoria.com]
as a "stable" release."

Obviously, old hands mostly already have that "beta" [1] , but a
steady trickle of new arrivals won't. That "steady trickle" may be
insignificant now, but might grow. Just another idea.
[1] and/or recompile the source, or friends they can ask direct

Regards,
Pete