Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:35:03 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Tuesday, October 12, 2010 04:08:13 Simen kjaeraas wrote: >> Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote: >> > Except that copying Tango is taboo. We want to avoid any possible >> > accusation of >> > copying Tango's code or design. There have been issues in the past >> > where Tango >> > devs thought that we might be doing that, and we just don't want to >> > risk any >> > sort of problems with the Tango folks. So, whatever we put in Phobos, >> > we do it >> > without looking at Tango. >> >> You know, we might consider asking them for permission. That way, there >> should be no problems. > > That can be done, to be sure, but we definitely can't just look at their > code - or even API - and create something similar, and from what I > recall, most cases of trying to get permission have a been a problem > (primarily due to there being multiple authors, I think). If there's > only one author for the stream code in Tango, that would be easier. > > Regardless, the point is that we can't just go and look at the Tango API > and use it to give ourselves ideas on what to do with Phobos.
I doubt the copyright law can protect API definitions. In that case projects like Wine (winehq.org) couldn't exist. What do you think?
