digitalmars.D.announce - my opinion in secretive D license
- arnuld (35/40) May 25 2006 i just started to learn c++, then i heard about "D". it looked good. i s...
i just started to learn c++, then i heard about "D". it looked good. i searched your web-site for information, i thought i should start learning it but you are secretive about exact information of your licence. i tried to search yur web-site for license of D but concluded that you do not want to tell openly how exactly you licensed D. If you want to keep D under a ``Proprietary license'', then just go ahead and do it. why do you fear of something?. if you want to keep D oen-source, then go ahead and do it. ----------------------- you have made things confusing like this: Q. Will D be open source? A: The front end for D is open source, and the source comes with the compiler. There is a SourceForge project underway to create a Gnu implementation of D from this.it is like : Q: what's your name? A: yeah, i am hungry.Q: Which parts of the Digital Mars D implementation are Free software? [Apr 04] The DMD front-end source is available under dual ( GPL and Artistic) license. Phobos, the D standard library, is now licensed under a zlib/libpng license unless the individual file specifies otherwise. The DMD compiler, back-end and libraries are licensed non-distributable under a DigitalMars license. The D language specification and accompanying documents are similarly copyrighted to DigitalMars. -- JustinCalvarese, additions by AndersFBjörklundthis time Q has put limit on the answer.The D language comes free. You can download the compiler (DMD) and standard library (Phobos) in a package that includes the Windows and the Linux (x86) system.even Microsoft distributes its Media layer free & that is not FLOSS.---- i am not asking you to make D OpenSource, i am asking you to be clear. Keeping users of D confused will not make things better. only making things technically better will not guarntee any success. see WINDOWS, the much buggier OS, if not most, *but* it is a success. the richest person on this planet made his fortune not by selling airplanes, rails or petroleum but by selling most buggy OS. *technical* matter (at OS level) doensn'n play here. what do you think? it is just a logical explanation. be clear on D, please. just a user thanks for your recious time. -- arnuld
May 25 2006