Open Source Software Licenses
Vinod
i'm pasting this just to refresh everybody's memory.
It is extracted from following site
http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/opensource.html
What Does "Open Source" Mean Today?
The meaning of "open source" is very much in flux. According to
opensource.org, an oversight organization for the open source
movement, theterm "open source" doesn't just mean that licensees have
access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source
software must comply with the following criteria:
1. Free Redistribution. The license may not restrict any party from
selling or giving away the software as a component or an aggregate
software distribution containing several programs from several
sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such
sale.
2. Source Code. The program must include source code, and must allow
distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form
of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-
publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a
reasonable reproduction cost -- preferably, downloading via the
Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in
which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated
source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a
preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works. The license must allow modifications and derived
works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as
the license of the original software
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code. The license may restrict
source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the
license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code
for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license
must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified
source code. The license may require derived works to carry a
different name or version number from the original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups. The license must not
discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor. The license must not
restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of
endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used
in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
7. Distribution of License. The rights attached to the program must
apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for
execution of an additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product. The rights attached to
the program must not depend on the program's being part of a
particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from
that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the
program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed
should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction
with the original software distribution.
9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software. The license must not
place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with
the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that
all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source
software.
Andrés
The thing is, you won't be able to do much with it (other than waste your time), simply because I'm in the process of rewriting a big part of it (specifically, the part that talks to the database to solve the schema issue and to support other dmbs).
As a result of this <time consuming> process, not only it'll crash, it will just plain not work.
I'll reply to this with another post with the link in a few minutes.
--
Andrés
Andrés
Vinod
why you are getting upset ?? What is there to be upset of ??
I downloaded your code and will get back to you with my comments but
you should post the code which you released in your stable version not
the one which u changed now as that was the working version, through
that only the changes can be done as other developer might not agree
with the way you are planning to read schemas or trying to implement
other changes..Maybe other developer is having some other ways. so
both can post their code.
Infact both versions should be available, stable one which you
released and the one in your current state (which you have already
done)... This is how it is done for all the other projects..
On Feb 21, 3:34 pm, "Andrés" <xal1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here:http://www.softwarethinking.net/cslagen/CSLAGen-Source-Unstable-20070...
Joseph G Mellon
I can fully understand why is upset to be honest.
Because no matter what one does there are always complaints, the more you do the more is expected. I'm sure this will effect the update frequency in the future as the guy will be totally de-motivated at the moment.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: CslaGe...@googlegroups.com [mailto:CslaGe...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Vinod
Sent: 21 February 2007 15:16
To: CslaGenerator
Subject: Re: Open Source Software Licenses
Andres,
why you are getting upset ?? What is there to be upset of ??
I downloaded your code and will get back to you with my comments but you should post the code which you released in your stable version not the one which u changed now as that was the working version, through that only the changes can be done as other developer might not agree with the way you are planning to read schemas or trying to implement other changes..Maybe other developer is having some other ways. so both can post their code.
Infact both versions should be available, stable one which you released and the one in your current state (which you have already done)... This is how it is done for all the other projects..
On Feb 21, 3:34 pm, "Andrés" <xal1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here:http://www.softwarethinking.net/cslagen/CSLAGen-Source-Unstable-20070...
>
Daniel Wood
But the way you are coming across is just that.
The normal way of working is to have a bit more respect for other people with a bit of give and take. All your emails seem to be of the demanding variety and you are not listening to the advice that has been generously supplied.
This group has been happily working for some time now with very little disharmony. However you seem to have arrived in this group like a bull in the proverbial china shop. Andres has been working hard to fix problems and sort out issues which your attitude hopefully will not have affected.
Being a key member of the team means he is the best person at the moment to decide on changes and how to implement them. Perhaps you should watch how the group works before jumping in with both feet.
Daniel
Daniel Wood | Developer | JMC IT, Riverside, Agecroft Road, Manchester, M27 8SJ | Tel:0161 925 7777 | Fax:0161 925 7700 | Email:Danie...@jmc.it | Web:www.jmc.it
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action based on this communication. If you have received this communication in error please contact Danie...@jmc.it and delete this communication and any copies of it. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of JMC IT. JMC IT monitors e-mails to ensure its systems operate effectively and to minimise the risk of viruses.
JM Computing Limited | Registered in Cardiff No. 1131358 | Registered office as above
-----Original Message-----
Xal
one that cared for this project. I've been working on it mostly alone
(with the exception of a few contributors that have kindly sent me
stuff in the past).
I've been privately working on this project and have made my progress
available to anyone who wanted it. I've spent countless hours helping
and supporting other people too. I've hosted public version control
services in my own computer and at my own expense.
But... I haven't moved it back to the main source. And let's get one
thing straight: I'm by no means obliged to send anyone the source
code. I'll do it because I want to, because I like to. But not because
I have to.
Yes, the project started as open source but that doesn't mean that I
can't make my own private version. The fact that I make it publically
available is just a detail.
So I don't HAVE to make the latest source code available as you say.
And I don't HAVE to make releases with their corresponding source code
included as you say.
And once again, to make it very clear: I will move everything back to
a public place and the project will be where I believe it belongs, but
not until I'm done with the current process. It is my choice and my
right.
So, if you want, you can look at it this way: My work is not currently
open sourced.
But it will be.
I offered you my help (and so have others), but you refused to accept
it. All you did so far was attack me and try to lecture me for not
giving you the source code.
Vinod
the thing is right... What is right is clearly written in black and
white and i have posted the link also for that.. It's not me who is
deciding what is open source but it is the whole computer community
which is deciding..
& Right is that Open source code is not meant to be holded by a single
individual, It is open for all.
Before blaming me, please have a look at the complete scenario
1. A project started with a team work and was declared open source.
2. An Individual was working on it and he still kept it open source.
3. He took the feedback, guidelines and made the product available in
community to get response on errors, and get user feedback and
polished the product declaring that is open source.
4. But he distributed product in community without the source code
which is a direct violation of open Source.
For future, if he doesn't want to keep it open source, there are
different laws for that and that he has to see.
But what about the guys who spend the time and gave the base idea and
the feedback which was given and the research which was done by the
whole community in testing out the product in different business
scenarios.
Why we are using CSLA ?? Not just bcos it is free, but bcos source
code is open. The framework on which we are basing our business
application is open to us and if need arises we can modify it as per
our needs.
I have given my points on issues which were raised and i hope it is
clear. I have no regrets that i have done anything wrong, I have done
what is right and what should have done long before.
> > > Andrés- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Vinod
You are creating your own laws..
yes you can create your private versions but that doesn't mean you
will tag it as Open source, take all feedback and ideas from people,
incorporate in your product and go on polishing it without releasing
source code. That way, you are heading for a commercial product and
naming it as open source and all are unknowingly contributing in that.
This is illegal.
Till this date product was labelled as open source and you were
getting all the feedback from the users who were actually using it in
business applications and now all of a sudden you are changing it.
This is one of your posts only, where you have clealry mentioned it,
posted on May 6, 2006.
On Feb 21, 5:58 pm, "Xal" <xal1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Andrés
In the last 12 months there have only been 1 person (other than you) that asked me for the source code (Hi Steve!). At the time I was also in a similar process of making a big change so I couldn't send it to him and he understood.
That would be the main reason why I didn't rush into moving to a public source control system, because I was the only one working on it and as long as it stayed that way I didn't want to maintain a repository.
I've spent the last few days working until 4am in the morning working on making that release faster so that the schema thing was solved and that you could get the source code soon.
This conversation has escalated to a point where I'm not in the mood to talk about it or work hard to make that release faster.
This is getting old. You have the source code. If you're not happy with the way I've been managing things then you can either live with it and "forgive me" or make your own fork of the project.
Frankly, I don't care what you do or think.
--
Andrés
denzil
Have you got a copy of cslagen source from before you started work on
it?
If so can you give it to Vinod he can then go and set up his own
little group (of one I guess if this is the way he deals with people)
he can then run it how he seems fit and we can all get back to way we
used to be as a nice happy successful group.
Vinod,
I gave you the benefit of the doubt earlier
What is wrong with you, do you enjoy annoying people or are you just a
selfish small minded individual.
There are far better ways of getting on with a group including the
Open source community, Abusing fellow members without looking at the
complete picture, demanding things is really not the way to get one,
Life is not black and white, get over it and hopefully get lost
Cheers
Daniel
Andrés
You can go to the project's page in sourforge to get the last version before I started working on it, which is the place where I plan to move back...:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cslagen/
David A. Leedom
As much as most of us are offended by his unrelenting attack on Andres, he is just as offended by our complete and utter disregard to the letter of the law. I think most of us are more concerned with the spirit of the law and definition of Open Source.
Personally, I don't really care about these technicalities. (i.e. letter of the law....Gasp!) That fact that there is this great software out there that can make life HUGELY easier is wonderful.
-- <hr> The Hightower Group, Inc. Custom Software Solutions Designed To Fit Your Business Like A Glove. Box 50/Lititz, PA 17543 V:717-560-4002, 877-560-4002 x: 114 F:866-349-2306 www.hightowergroup.com
Chameleo...@gmail.com
sad angry dude. If you want to go back to the days where it took 3
weeks to work out how to set up CSLAGen and get it working, then
please do, but don't drag us ALL back there with you!
Maybe you never experienced the pain of trying to get it working back
then. I'm sure you didn't, because if you had you could not possibly
have such an attitude toward Andre and the extremely generous effort
he has put in.
For your own sake Vinod, you need to stop seeing everything from your
perspective, and think about how you impact others in the world. You
may have a technical point there with your argument about open source,
but where is it getting you? And how is it likely to affect the rest
of us? Sadly, I have to say it all looks very negative.
Andre, take a few deep breaths... no better than that, take a proper
break, have a few beers, do whatever it takes to release the bad karma
this issue has injected into the CSLAGen forum. I know I speak not
only for myself but for a lot of people who greatly appreciate your
efforts and rely on the fantastic work you do. There will always be
people like Vinod in the world, the important thing is to minimise the
negative impact they would otherwise have on the rest of us.
David
Chameleo...@gmail.com
Daniel Wood
Vinod,
Here you go you can now go and play to your hearts content
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cslagen/
Try not to annoy us to much in the meantime
From:
CslaGe...@googlegroups.com [mailto:CslaGe...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrés
Sent: 21 February 2007 16:37
To: CslaGe...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Open Source Software
Licenses
Daniel,
<br
stevemcl
the great work Andres has done.
I had written my own CSLA generator targeting version 1.0 of the
framework and was thinking of trying to update it when I came across
your work. This thing is awesome!
I asked one question about a perceived bug and Andres jumped right on
it and said it'll be fixed in the next release.
To see this clown come on here and upset someone who's donating so
much time and effort is crazy.
By the way, there are numerous open source licenses frequently used in
the world. I see under the sourceforge project that no license is
specified. That means that it can be up to the individual what he'd
like to do. I have no problem with the way Andres is proceeding--in
fact it makes sense to me.
The generic term "Open Source" does not dictate anything.
Keep up the good work! And thank you for saving me lots of time with
your incredible efforts!
Bill Larman
Keep up the good work.
I am happy with the way things are.
Vinod:
If you are not happy with CSLAGen then why not try and use something
else.
I believe there are other templates available at CSLAContrib and I
think that MyGeneration has some CSLA templates.
I have never tried either of these, but they may give you what you
want.
Bill
Chris Denslow
Stop being such a child and grow up!!
I have half a mind to suggest to Andrés that he takes all references
to "Open Source" off the tool and keeps working on it himself; after
all he truly is the only one that has done anything to help anyone
here with this tool.
Even if he did so and started charging minimial licensing fees I know
that I would still support him.
For Gods sake why are you so angry , bitter and twisted about
something that isn't really hurting you or anyone else.
There are folk starving and dying all around the world and you are
getting bent out of shape about some bloody source code. It's hardly a
matter of life and death!!
Bye bye and don't come back until you have calmed down and matured to
the stage where you can wait for Andrés to give us working code...
Chris
will....@phoenix-data.co.uk
Here is another suggestion Vinod. Why not just go and hand code all
your classes instead of using CSLAGen?
I'm really appreciative of the time that CSALGen has saved me, and if
it throws any errors I deal with them, because it's still quicker than
hand coding from scratch.