Distribution and copyright on ActiveState base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe
pal...@yahoo.com
(open-source) application. However, that is not a threaded build and
so I was thinking of using the base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe from
ActiveTcl 8.4.16 instead.
I had two questions about the license -
1. Does ActiveState allow redistributing of exes wrapped using base-tk-
thread-win32-ix86.exe as a base?
2. If so, another issue comes up - the base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe
file includes various resources like the version, copyright, company
information, icon and so on. If I wrap an application, can I replace
all these ActiveTcl resources in the wrapped application with my own
application resources?
Thanks in advance
/Ashok
pal...@yahoo.com
Synic
> I had two questions about the license -
>
> 1. Does ActiveState allow redistributing of exes wrapped using base-tk-
> thread-win32-ix86.exe as a base?
Yep. Not allowing their distribution would negate the value of the Tcl
Developers Kit (TDK). That said, things might be different if you're
wrapping their base kit with a third party app (but, I'd be surprised
if that were the case).
> 2. If so, another issue comes up - the base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe
> file includes various resources like the version, copyright, company
> information, icon and so on.
Yep.
> If I wrap an application, can I replace all these ActiveTcl resources
> in the wrapped application with my own application resources?
Yep. There might be isolated cases where this or that might not be
easy to replace, but, they'd be considered bugs rather than by design.
I definitely recommend ActiveState's TDK. It saves a lot of time and
effort and the staff are helpful if you come across any problems or
bugs.
Mark Janssen
> palm...@yahoo.com <palm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I had two questions about the license -
>
> > 1. Does ActiveState allow redistributing of exes wrapped using base-tk-
> > thread-win32-ix86.exe as a base?
>
> Yep. Not allowing their distribution would negate the value of the Tcl
> Developers Kit (TDK). That said, things might be different if you're
> wrapping their base kit with a third party app (but, I'd be surprised
> if that were the case).
>
>From the license http://www.activestate.com/Products/activetcl/licensing.plex
point 4 this indeed seems allowed.
> > 2. If so, another issue comes up - the base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe
> > file includes various resources like the version, copyright, company
> > information, icon and so on.
>
> Yep.
>
> > If I wrap an application, can I replace all these ActiveTcl resources
> > in the wrapped application with my own application resources?
>
> Yep. There might be isolated cases where this or that might not be
> easy to replace, but, they'd be considered bugs rather than by design.
>
> I definitely recommend ActiveState's TDK. It saves a lot of time and
> effort and the staff are helpful if you come across any problems or
> bugs.
I don't know where you get this info, but nowhere in the license do I
see that you are permitted to make modifications to the package that
do not originate from AS. I would say this is therefore a No. Note
that the license agreement for the TDK is different to the ActiveTcl
license. So for the TDK this may or may not be allowed (I didn't
check).
Mark
pal...@yahoo.com
free ActiveTcl distribution, not their commercial TDK.
/Ashok
PS I have no idea why all my posts through Google are showing up
duplicated.
MartinLemburg@Siemens-PLM
> > > in the wrapped application with my own application resources?
>
> > Yep. There might be isolated cases where this or that might not be
> > easy to replace, but, they'd be considered bugs rather than by design.
>
> > I definitely recommend ActiveState's TDK. It saves a lot of time and
> > effort and the staff are helpful if you come across any problems or
> > bugs.
>
> I don't know where you get this info, but nowhere in the license do I
> see that you are permitted to make modifications to the package that
> do not originate from AS. I would say this is therefore a No. Note
> that the license agreement for the TDK is different to the ActiveTcl
> license. So for the TDK this may or may not be allowed (I didn't
> check).
As read from other comp.lang.tcl messages, where it is e.g. described
how to replace the icons from the base starpacks, I would expect, that
this is allowed!
Especially with people like Jeff Hobbs taking part on those
discussions!
Best regards,
Martin
On Oct 19, 2:42 pm, Mark Janssen <mpc.jans...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 okt, 13:43, Synic <flavp+hfr...@nhgbaf.arg.nh> wrote:
>
> > palm...@yahoo.com <palm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I had two questions about the license -
>
> > > 1. Does ActiveState allow redistributing of exes wrapped using base-tk-
> > > thread-win32-ix86.exe as a base?
>
> > Yep. Not allowing their distribution would negate the value of the Tcl
> > Developers Kit (TDK). That said, things might be different if you're
> > wrapping their base kit with a third party app (but, I'd be surprised
> > if that were the case).
>
> >From the licensehttp://www.activestate.com/Products/activetcl/licensing.plex
Mark Janssen
> > I had two questions about the license -
>
> > 1. Does ActiveState allow redistributing of exes wrapped using base-tk-
> > thread-win32-ix86.exe as a base?
>
> Yep. Not allowing their distribution would negate the value of the Tcl
> Developers Kit (TDK). That said, things might be different if you're
> wrapping their base kit with a third party app (but, I'd be surprised
> if that were the case).
Note that TDK is not ActiveTcl and their licenses are completely
different. But even for ActiveTcl point 4 of
http://www.activestate.com/Products/activetcl/license_agreement.plex
seems to indicate you can.
>
> > 2. If so, another issue comes up - the base-tk-thread-win32-ix86.exe
> > file includes various resources like the version, copyright, company
> > information, icon and so on.
>
> Yep.
>
> > If I wrap an application, can I replace all these ActiveTcl resources
> > in the wrapped application with my own application resources?
>
> Yep. There might be isolated cases where this or that might not be
> easy to replace, but, they'd be considered bugs rather than by design.
>
<snipped>
I can't see any part of the license of ActiveTcl that allows you to
distribute modified parts of the ActiveTcl package where the
modifications do not originate from ActiveState. I would therefor say
that this is not allowed when using ActiveTcl. The TDK may or may not
be a different case (I didn't check).
Mark
Richard Owlett
> [snip]
>
> I had two questions about the license -
>
Have you considered asking ActiveState?
It is *THEIR* license after all.
Synic
> On 19 okt, 13:43, Synic <flavp+hfr...@nhgbaf.arg.nh> wrote:
>> palm...@yahoo.com <palm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > If I wrap an application, can I replace all these ActiveTcl resources
>> > in the wrapped application with my own application resources?
>>
>> Yep. There might be isolated cases where this or that might not be
>> easy to replace, but, they'd be considered bugs rather than by design.
>>
>> I definitely recommend ActiveState's TDK. It saves a lot of time and
>> effort and the staff are helpful if you come across any problems or
>> bugs.
>
> I don't know where you get this info, but nowhere in the license do I
> see that you are permitted to make modifications to the package that
> do not originate from AS.
Well, the info is derived from the fact that it's a feature of TDK which
I've used, assisted with bug reports on (for TDK4), and they've put in
a good deal of effort making the interface easy work with :-).
(Obviously, it would be poor form to modify the basekit and release the
basekit as their own, but, that's not what the original poster was asking
about.)
The original query above seemed more a technical one rather than a
licensing one: can the resources from the basekit be modified when
building a starkit? Yes, they can.
The way I see it, AS make ActiveTcl available to: (1) Promote the
language, (2) Ease the tech support burden by having a standard platform
of binaries, packages and basekits, (3) Give customers an easy way to
be on a compliant platform, and, (4) Promote ActiveState's corporate
reputation generally.
> I would say this is therefore a No. Note
> that the license agreement for the TDK is different to the ActiveTcl
> license. So for the TDK this may or may not be allowed (I didn't
> check).
I can't comment for ActiveState on their legals, but, if the license
were as restrictive as all that, and people couldn't use their basekits
in their apps, the market for TDK would collapse overnight ;-).
Mark Janssen
It seems your still confusing the TDK with the ActiveTcl distribution,
they (and their licenses) are not the same.
Also I didn't say you can't use their basekits to wrap applications
and distribute those. I said that the license allows the
redistribution of parts of ActiveTcl (such as the basekit) in
unmodified form. I deduce from that that it is allowed to embed your
own custom icons in a starpack, but you are not allowed to change the
executable info such as copyright and companyname. The first doesn't
require changing of the executable while the second does.
I do however support the suggestion elsewhere in this thread to check
with AS. They will know for sure.
Mark
Synic
[...]
> I said that the license allows the
> redistribution of parts of ActiveTcl (such as the basekit) in
> unmodified form. I deduce from that that it is allowed to embed your
> own custom icons in a starpack, but you are not allowed to change the
> executable info such as copyright and companyname.
I think you'll find that probably only applies if you're redistributing
the basekit in an unmodified form. When the basekit's used as part of
a starpack, then the starpack's basekit component can indeed have that
copyright notice in the resources changed so that it displays the
correct copyright info for your newly generated starpack app.
Fundamentally, the Copyright section in the resources part of an
executible file is where information on the copyright holder of the
application goes. In creating any starpack, you take a basekit and use
it as a stub to create a new application. That's all part and parcel
of the process.
It could be well argued that by *NOT* changing that resources info you
are attributing your code (and any flaws) to ActiveState as a third
party ;-).
By all means, you should acknowledge the copyright holders of packages
and libraries that you use. Personally, I do this in an Acknowledgements
tab in my software's About dialog.
[...]
> I do however support the suggestion elsewhere in this thread to check
> with AS. They will know for sure.
Indeed.
pal...@yahoo.com
ActiveState:
---begin quote
Hi Ashok,
Yes, per your first question you are allowed by point 4 of the license
to redistribute a wrapped executable that does not expose the
language:
(see license at the following link)
http://www.activestate.com/Products/activetcl/licensing.plex
Regarding your second question, we don't place any restrictions on
changing the Windows resource information in the basekit.
---end quote
On Oct 19, 12:48 pm, "palm...@yahoo.com" <palm...@yahoo.com> wrote: