On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:58, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is another option: work together again. Is an option, in theory. But doesn’t looks like happening any time soon, sadly :( Esteban > > On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:56, [email protected] wrote: > >> Due to Ben leaving, we have one MIT version and his version. >> Now, we will have the Pharo fork and his version. >> >> Maybe is it time to fork the repo and get our own under the Pharo project. >> >> Phil >> >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Luc Fabresse <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Since the code of Spec has been integrated in Pharo when it was MIT, I think >> that this is not a problem. >> To me, the new licence only apply to the new code in the repository of Spec >> since the licence changed. >> So now, no spec code should be loaded in the Pharo base image. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Luc >> >> >> 2014-08-26 10:18 GMT+02:00 Serge Stinckwich <[email protected]>: >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:03, Serge Stinckwich <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Alain Rastoul <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> +1 for the GTInspector, and the Moose tools/paradigm too (Roassal, >>>>> Glamour, >>>>> Moose and others), all that stuff is great step forward and could arouse >>>>> interest from doubtful people. >>>>> I remember myself failing to show some collegues at work how the smalltalk >>>>> system could be a cool tool to play with, even for people sticking on >>>>> dotNet, Delphi or C++. >>>>> And sometimes they remember that too ... >>>>> (Smalltalk? Squeak? -at that time- that blinking and poping toy ? hahaha >>>>> ...) >>>>> :( >>>>> Still working on that like a flea (?- a morpion) >>>>> >>>>> Morphic removed is good news - clumsy, buggy and weird - but I don't >>>>> understand the relationship with GTInspector ? >>>>> I googled about that and just found a post of you about Bloc in the >>>>> mailing >>>>> list, it sounds like a good idea, and I'm sure you'll manage to do it >>>>> cleanly, but I'm also very curious about that: big bang or dependency >>>>> injection and small steps? other patterns, techniques ? a link on Bloc ? >>>>> I'm also curious about Spec and it's status after it's change to GPL ? >>>>> Will >>>>> it be supported in the future ? What are the alternatives ? >>>> >>>> Yes, apparently spec is distributed now under a dual licence : MIT >>>> when used as an external library (not sure what it means when you use >>>> Smalltalk) >>>> and GPL when integrated in an IDE ... I think that this is a potential >>>> problem for Pharo. >>>> >>> GPL is not compatible with Pharo. All code that is part of the Pharo main >>> distribution >>> is either historical (Apple Licence) or MIT. >>> >>> We even let people sign a document that makes this clear. >>> >>> New code has to be MIT, we do not accept any other license (as part of the >>> main distribution). >>> >>> e.g. Zinc was done because the HTTP server we were using was made GPL (it >>> did not have >>> a licence when we started to use it). >> >> I completely agree with you. This why I was worried with this double >> licencing of spec. >> >> Regards, >> -- >> Serge Stinckwich >> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) >> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk >> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ >> >> >> > >
