Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization > to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the > source code for any released product that included your library. As a > result, most people working on commercial published softw

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Nicolas Neuss writes: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: > >> Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization >> to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the >> source code for any released product that included your library. As a >> result, most people work

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > In-house use would be outside of the scope of the GPL, since no > "distribution" would occur. This means that in-house "distribution" to employees would not count as distribution in the GPL sense. OK, this might indeed be the most reasonab

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Nicolas Neuss writes: > p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > >> In-house use would be outside of the scope of the GPL, since no >> "distribution" would occur. > > This means that in-house "distribution" to employees would not count as > distribution in the GPL sense. OK, this

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 11:22:57 -0400, John Hasler said: They are not required to publish it. They are merely required to distribute it along with the binaries. If you offer source to everyone to whom you sell binaries you are done. In practice this amounts to publication. Every customer would receiv

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 15:29:44 -0400, John Hasler said: They might, but there are cases where they did not. One can't rely on this unlikely possibility, which becomes increasingly unlikely the more sales are made. The point is that _you_ are not required to publish anything. It hardly matters wh

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-21 15:29:44 -0400, John Hasler said: > >> Of course, if the possibility that someone might pass the software on >> worries you, the solution is simple: don't link to GPL works. > > > Which is why many developers choose to avoid this possibility and use > LGP

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: Sure. And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay you for a commercial license. So you can have your cake (GPL licensing) and eat it too

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article <878w9k1k8l@thumper.dhh.gt.org>, John Hasler wrote: > Ralph writes: > > I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic > > means of ensuring maximal adoption. > > You assume that everyone has maximum adoption as their primary goal. Indeed, if maximal adoptio

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article , Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: > > > Sure. > > > > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? > > Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay > you for a commercial licen

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 10:52:58 -0400, John Hasler said: You assume that everyone has maximum adoption as their primary goal. I assume that the author's goal is maximizing the amount of open source - and in fact, it is Pascal's stated goal - that others who use his library will open their source code

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 13:03:31 -0400, RG said: I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic means of ensuring maximal adoption. Here is where you are imposing your choices on others. Not everyone shares this quality metric of yours. See my reply to John Hasler for why maxim

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

RG writes: > In article , > Raffael Cavallaro > wrote: > >> On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: >> >> > Sure. >> > >> > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? >> >> Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > It does not get you "anything additional", but it gets you something > _less_: a proprietary product that uses your own code to draw your > user base away from you. This is quite understandable - I would not really like seeing Microsoft use my code. However, when I was i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 16:51:46 -0400, John Hasler said: I guess this is why Linux has been totally eclipsed by BSD. 1. Linux isn't a *library*, it's an operating system. A GPL operating system doesn't force GPL licensing for any application that runs on it. A GPL library *does* force GPL licensing f

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 20:28:25 -0400, John Hasler said: No it isn't. The Open Group which does the official UNIX certification would beg to differ: It's a heavily modified Mach single-server ke

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article <871vfbzrb8@thumper.dhh.gt.org>, jhas...@newsguy.com says... > The Berkeley license as well as _some_ other Open Source licenses permit > them to keep some of their changes secret. This is the very reason some > programmers use the GPL. While I respect Pascal's decision to use wha

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 22:48:27 -0400, John Hasler said: Purchasing a certificate granting the right to label one's product UNIX does not make it a BSD. Being a derivative of 4.4 BSD makes it a BSD; Being certified by the Open Group makes it a UNIX. Mac OS X is a BSD UNIX. The market reality...

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > In short, I don't think GPL licensing gets you anything additional in > terms of getting code open sourced. Users who need to keep their > source closed either won't use it, or will use in in a way that allows > them not to open the source (e.g., Paul Graham's viaweb a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > That does not keep other people from contributing relevant portions of > code under the GPL, if they so desire. Of course, and it should not. But I think that people contributing to a library usually do so under the same license which is used for the original body of cod

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 04:53:04 -0400, Lieven Marchand said: As far as I can tell, GPL CLISP would allow you to distribute your commercial applications compiled and dumped with it. My understanding is that if your published application (commercial or otherwise) uses facilities of CLISP not generally a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 09:11:03 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: It is not correct to say that Mac OS X "is" BSD Unix for normal definitions of "is". Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." Mac OS X *is* a UNIX by the only legal definition of UNIX and for normal definitions of "i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Mar 23, 9:11 am, Hyman Rosen wrote: > On 3/22/2010 8:01 PM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > > 2. Mac OS X is BSD Unix. It has existed for half the time that linux > > has, and has more than 5 times the web client share of linux, so yes, > > BSD is on its way to eclipsing linux as a client OS. > I

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Mar 21, 10:14 pm, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: [...] > > Which is why many developers choose to avoid this possibility and use > > LGPL/LLGPL/BSD/MIT/Apache licensed libraries instead. And now we've > > come full circle. > Sure. > And the

Re: chrisv is a liar. chrisv is a piece of shit.

"RJack" wrote in message news:1mwdnbvv-ozttjxwnz2dnuvz_sadn...@giganews.com... > One Shot, One Kill wrote: >> "chrisv" wrote in message >> news:gjdhq5tgi1emdk5rd90snnm78137s0a...@4ax.com... >> >> chrisv is a liar. chrisv is a stupid piece of shit. >> >> > Did chrisv piss in your Wheaties bowl

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: > > > > Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." > > Not really. Darwin may be, but all the graphical folderol running on it > is rather descended (or written new) from older MacOS code not based on > BSD. Well, a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 09:41:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: Since much of the discussion in this newsgroup focuses on license features and requirements, saying that Mac OS X "is" BSD needlessly confuses that issue. Saying that Mac OS X is BSD is: 1. true 2. a counterexample to the claim that linux is tr

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-23 09:41:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: > >> Since much of the discussion in this newsgroup >> focuses on license features and requirements, saying that Mac OS X >> "is" BSD needlessly confuses that issue. > > Saying that Mac OS X is BSD is: > > 1. true For so

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-24 15:23:28 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: Actually, MacOSX is just NeXTSTEP, and is older than Linux, so it's not surprizing it has more web clients than Linux. After all, NeXTSTEP was the system where the web was INVENTED, and where the first web browser was ever IMPLEMENTED!

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In gnu.misc.discuss Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: > > My principal objection to the GPL is that its license requirements > regarding opening source code make it very unpopular with many > commercial developers, and therefore whenever possi

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 06:06:09 -0400, Andrew Haley said: There's nothing ironic about it. The FSF seeks to maximize freedom, so licenses code whichever way works best. Libraries sometimes have different needs from applications. Which is why I suggest that Pascal's lisp libraries would be more usefu

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:44:14 -0400, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-25 06:06:09 -0400, Andrew Haley said: > >> There's nothing ironic about it. The FSF seeks to maximize freedom, so >> licenses code whichever way works best. Libraries sometimes have >> different needs from applications. >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 09:51:04 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: The FSF does not believe that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. The release of the Library GPL is an implicit recognition of the fact that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. Renaming it to the Lesser GPL isn't likely to convince anyone old

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In comp.lang.lisp Hyman Rosen wrote: > On 3/25/2010 10:05 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Licenses covering a work "as a whole" are hard to press > > when the material they cover is functionally a drop-in > > replacement of existing non-free libraries. That makes > > "mere aggregation" a really good d

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 09:59:52 -0400, Tamas K Papp said: I disagree -- I don't think that the FSF considers the GPL a "poor fit" for libraries. Quite the opposite (see [1]). They just recognized that in certain situations, some people would prefer something like the LGPL, and I guess that they wanted

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In comp.lang.lisp Alexander Terekhov wrote: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> > Hyman Rosen wrote: fix(f) != f ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu

Re: "GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process"

On 29 Mar, 14:00, Hyman Rosen wrote: > On 3/26/2010 1:29 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > >http://weblog.ipcentral.info/archives/2007/03/delusions_of_gr.html > > Wow. A website dedicated to glorifying the denial of freedom to > software users is whining about GPLv3. Shocking, just shocking. And o

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

OK I'm so fucking tired of this. I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. BSD is free. GPL is free. Alexander, please stop drinking de Raadt's Kool Aid. Or Shut up and Hack. Come to this list when PCC is good enough to be on OpenBSD by default. ___

NYC LOCAL: Wednesday 5 May 2010 NYCBUG: Kevin Figueroa on packet manipulation with Scapy

Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 23:20:36 -0400 To: annou...@lists.nycbug.org From: NYC*BUG Announcements Subject: [announce] NYC*BUG this week Reply-To: annou...@lists.nycbug.org * Upcoming meetings * LOPSA PIC Conference * BSDCan * * * * May 05, 2010 Scapy 6:45 PM,

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: OK I'm so fucking tired of this. I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. BSD is free. GPL is free. Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will soon reside in history's trashbin that contains Urban Legends. Alexander, please stop drin

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

RJack writes: > VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: >> OK I'm so fucking tired of this. >> >> I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. >> >> BSD is free. GPL is free. >> > > Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will > soon reside in history's trashbin that contains Urban Lege

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

RJack writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> RJack writes: >> >>> VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: OK I'm so fucking tired of this. I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. BSD is free. GPL is free. >>> Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will >>

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: RJack writes: VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: OK I'm so fucking tired of this. I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. BSD is free. GPL is free. Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will soon reside in history's trashbin that contains Urban

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: RJack writes: David Kastrup wrote: RJack writes: VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: OK I'm so fucking tired of this. I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. BSD is free. GPL is free. Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion will soon reside in h

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

RJack writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> RJack writes: >> >>> David Kastrup wrote: RJack writes: > VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote: >> OK I'm so fucking tired of this. >> >> I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux. >> >> BSD is free. GPL is free. >> > Don

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > You won't find any. And that's the point. Since it is YOU GNUtians who are crying "copyright violation", "copyright violation"... which is a tort and on a large scale it is even a crime, IT'S UP TO YOU TO PROVE THE CLAIM YOU IDIOT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negat

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 8:11 AM, RJack wrote: Please provide links to those US federal judges who *do not* "believe the terms of the GPL can be ignored." I await with 'bated breath for your documentation. Sure, here you are: PROGRESS SO

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 10:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: the case was about alleged contract breach It doesn't matter what the case was about. Your fellow crank asked for links to "US federal judges who *do not* believe the terms of the GPL can be ignored", and I provided a link to a US judge who shows

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 5/5/2010 8:11 AM, RJack wrote: > > Please provide links to those US federal judges who *do not* "believe > > the terms of the GPL can be ignored." I await with 'bated breath for > > your documentation. > > Sure, here you are: >

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Alexander Terekhov writes: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> >> On 5/5/2010 8:11 AM, RJack wrote: >> > Please provide links to those US federal judges who *do not* "believe >> > the terms of the GPL can be ignored." I await with 'bated breath for >> > your documentation. >> >> Sure, here you are: >>

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> You won't find any. And that's the point. > > Since it is YOU GNUtians who are crying "copyright violation", > "copyright violation"... which is a tort and on a large scale it is even > a crime, IT'S UP TO YOU TO PROVE THE CLAIM YOU ID

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 5/5/2010 10:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > the case was about alleged contract breach > > It doesn't matter what the case was about. Your fellow crank The fact that Judge Saris *rejected the plea for injunction* regarding alleged breach of the GPL while she was n

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > A(iv): Progress/NuSphere violated the GPL License and thus, their rights > under the GPL were automatically terminated. > > B Primarily and permanently enjoin > (iii) Progress/Nusphere from copying, modifying, sublicensing or > distributing the MySQL program. "DENIE

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup writes: > Award compensatory and _punitive_ damages [...] (punitive damages > for contract violation of a contract without punitive terms?) Presumably based on the noncontract claims. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 10:52 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: rejected not allowed unenforceable NOT a proof can NOT be ignored That's enough multiple negatives to open a wormhole to the crank universe of twist and spin. Your fellow crank asked for a judge who does not believe the terms of the GPL can be ign

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 10:56 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: "DENIED" http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13584730711160488510 That's because the standards required for a preliminary injunction are high. In the judge's words: In

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > If she considers a breach ... She did NOT rule that there was a breach, you retard. She ruled quite the opposite: "With respect to the General Public License ("GPL"), MYSQL has not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm."

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> If she considers a breach ... > > She did NOT rule that there was a breach, you retard. She ruled quite > the opposite: > > "With respect to the General Public License ("GPL"), MYSQL has > not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of su

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Sonny! Uncle Hasler has spoken! John Hasler wrote: > > David Kastrup writes: > > Award compensatory and _punitive_ damages [...] (punitive damages > > for contract violation of a contract without punitive terms?) > > Presumably based on the noncontract claims. MySQL's case/claim *regarding the

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 5/5/2010 10:56 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > "DENIED" > > http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13584730711160488510 > > That's because the standards required for a preliminary > injunction are high. In the judge's words: >

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 5/5/2010 10:52 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > rejected not allowed unenforceable NOT a proof can NOT be ignored > > That's enough multiple negatives to open a wormhole to the crank > universe of twist and spin. Your fellow crank asked for a judge > who does not belie

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Alexander Terekhov writes: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> >> On 5/5/2010 10:52 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> > rejected not allowed unenforceable NOT a proof can NOT be ignored >> >> That's enough multiple negatives to open a wormhole to the crank >> universe of twist and spin. Your fellow crank as

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > > [...] > >> If she considers a breach ... > > > > She did NOT rule that there was a breach, you retard. She ruled quite > > the opposite: > > > > "With respect to the General Public License ("GPL"), MYSQL has > >

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 5/5/2010 10:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: the case was about alleged contract breach It doesn't matter what the case was about. Your fellow crank asked for links to "US federal judges who *do not* believe the terms of the GPL can be ignored", and I provided a link to a

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 5/5/2010 10:52 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: rejected not allowed unenforceable NOT a proof can NOT be ignored That's enough multiple negatives to open a wormhole to the crank universe of twist and spin. Your fellow crank asked for a judge who does not believe the terms

Justice draws nigh

All this bantering about prior cases is moot. The SFLC has just filed a request for a pre-conference motion for summary judgment against Westinghouse. The near future now holds all the answers about GPL enforcement. I'm sure Judge Scheindlin will suffers no fools in this action. Sincerely, R

Re: Justice draws nigh

RJack wrote: All this bantering about prior cases is moot. The SFLC has just filed a request for a pre-conference motion for summary judgment against Westinghouse. The near future now holds all the answers about GPL enforcement. I'm sure Judge Scheindlin will suffers no fools in this action.

Sufficient motivation?

As of a week or so ago, I am now the owner of a refurbished Insignia NS-WBRDVD BluRay disk player. Revised firmware for it may be downloaded here: As it happens, other people and I have trouble connecting to the internet

Re: Justice draws nigh

RJack wrote: > > RJack wrote: > > All this bantering about prior cases is moot. > > > > The SFLC has just filed a request for a pre-conference motion for > > summary judgment against Westinghouse. The near future now holds all the > > answers about GPL enforcement. I'm sure Judge Scheindlin will

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 4:12 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz Sometimes a broken link is just a broken link. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://list

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 2:26 PM, RJack wrote: This is an identical situation to those who claim nonexistent GPL settlement victories. Yes, it is. In both situations anti-GPL cranks cannot bring themselves to believe what has long been obvious to anyone else, so they twist and spin to avoid facing the truth

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 5/5/2010 2:26 PM, RJack wrote: > > This is an identical situation to those who claim nonexistent GPL > > settlement victories. > > Yes, it is. In both situations anti-GPL cranks cannot http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.t

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

On 5/5/2010 5:31 PM, RJack wrote: Sayeth Hyman Rosen: "Sometimes a broken link is just a broken link." Sayeth Hyman Rosen: "Commonly in an argument from ignorance or argument from personal incredulity, the speaker considers or asserts that something is false, implausible, or not obvious to them

Re: Significance of the GP licence.

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 5/5/2010 4:12 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://opensource.actiontec.com/mi1424wr/actiontec_opensrc_mi424wr-rev-e_fw-20-9-0.tgz Sayeth Hyman Rosen: "Sometimes a broken link is just a broken link." Sayeth Hyman Rosen: "Commonly in an argument from ignorance or argu