> > If everything was BSD I wouldn't care, but it is not, and R, SAGE,
> > Giniac, Maxima, FFTW, GSL are not going away and in many cases have
> > more users than the python libraries. We are taking a hard stance that
> > forces a lot of code to be rewritten.
>
> If by "we" you mean the BSD licens
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 5:52 PM, ggellner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>... I simply mean pragmatically using the GPL allows the largest
> set of open source code to be incorporated. BSD is great, but being
> less restrictive, it is functionally MORE restrictive for what I can
> use if I want to red
> I don't mean blame (as I don't care about the issues, but their is a
> LOT of GPL science code, forcing BSD because it is more free is an
> agenda), I simply mean pragmatically using the GPL allows the largest
> set of open source code to be incorporated. BSD is great, but being
> less restricti
> While I agree with you that it is a shame that there is fragmented
> code because of license differences, I disagree that the blame lies
> with the BSD license.
>
> Using this same argument, can I assume that you think it is the BSD's
> fault that numpy/scipy can't simply distribute/ship propri
> As I user I don't care at all about these licensing issues, but I do
> care about the hassle of having fragmented code because of license
> arguments. Though the BSD is `more free`, to keep this purity it most
> ignore all LGPL/GPL code like in the scipy community creating ghetto's
> like the sc
Well to add to user side of the survey (I use sympy all the time, but
haven't contributed anything at all).
I prefer GPL/LGPL like licenses. Partially this is the spirit, but
mostly this is pragmatism.
As I user I don't care at all about these licensing issues, but I do
care about the hassle of h
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 01:58:29PM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> >> I am all for Fair use of SymPy, as an informal way of saying that it
> >> is (at least) polite to for example cite us and consider contributing
> >> the changes back, because in the end, it helps everyone. But the BSD
> >> lice
>> I am all for Fair use of SymPy, as an informal way of saying that it
>> is (at least) polite to for example cite us and consider contributing
>> the changes back, because in the end, it helps everyone. But the BSD
>> license covers that --- it requires to give credit were credit is due.
>
> My
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:46:35AM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Kirill Smelkov
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 05:22:25PM -0800, Brian Granger wrote:
> >>
> >> I am almost a sympy developer (my recent work has not been merged
> >>
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Kirill Smelkov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 05:22:25PM -0800, Brian Granger wrote:
>>
>> I am almost a sympy developer (my recent work has not been merged
>> yet). I also don't know much about the history Kirr's contributions,
>> so I ap
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 01:08:41PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> Another thing is LGPL *is* very widely depolyed and is non-intrusive (e.g.
> on Linux systems, the _basic_ library GLibc is covered by LGPL, though
> any software can use and uses it -- Python (BSD), protprietary
> applications... *
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 05:22:25PM -0800, Brian Granger wrote:
>
> I am almost a sympy developer (my recent work has not been merged
> yet). I also don't know much about the history Kirr's contributions,
> so I apologize if I say anything (unintentionally) to hurt already
> sour relations. So..
I am almost a sympy developer (my recent work has not been merged
yet). I also don't know much about the history Kirr's contributions,
so I apologize if I say anything (unintentionally) to hurt already
sour relations. So...
Like Gael, I have the goal of wanting as many people as possible to be
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 09:47:18PM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> it's a very nice and honest email. Kirr has done a stellar job over
> the past year and half and we definitely would not be as advanced with
> sympy without him. I'll reply to his arguments in my next email.
I'll use my mail to repl
First of all I want to thank you, Kirill, it was great to enjoy your
support. You are certainly one of the most constructive persons I
know.
I think the problem is quite fundamental. Many developers are
investing quite a lot in an open source project, and they don't want
others to modify it witho
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Kirill Smelkov
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:44:41AM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Kirill Smelkov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:44:41AM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello Kirill,
>> >
>> > I am also against this patch. You di
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 14:47, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think we should stay with BSD, but not everyone agrees with me and
> when it reaches the point, that someone doesn't want to contribute
> anymore, because we use too permissive license, it needs to be
> discussed
18 matches
Mail list logo
