www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Flower opened

reply bobef <ads aad.asd> writes:
http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower.zip
http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower_older.zip
http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/thirdparty.zip

flower.zip is the latest work in progress version using ddl (thanks to h3hetic)

flower_older.zip is few days older back up without ddl, but unlike it is
working and usable

thirdparty.zip is dwt,ddl and whatever else is need to compile

this is absolutely everything, i just zipped the folders. i haven't been
working on this one for long time now and don't plan to resume it (reasons: see
my post about the new final scope blah blah stuff in the announce newsgroup)
the debugger is working and the ui is very advanced, although incomplete.
compiles with dmd 1.014 and phobos

LICENSE: use without restrictions at your own risk and responsibility unless
this use is resulting (directly or indirectly) harm to any sentient being
Jun 03 2007
next sibling parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
bobef wrote:
 LICENSE: use without restrictions at your own risk and responsibility unless
this use is resulting (directly or indirectly) harm to any sentient being

Gad I hate being the licensing nazi. Wait, no ... what's that thing that's like hate but is the opposite ... Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly nonsensical. If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their third cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code to their great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's husband, and he works for NASA and decides to give it to his astronaut friend who runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes the life support systems to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's breathing a bit awkward for a minute, I've just violated your license while not even touching your software. You've mixed what should be a liability disclaimer in as a (fairly ridiculous) licensing term. Oh right, and aside from that, you technically haven't allowed redistribution. Whether that's intentional or not, Idonno. I know that people don't like the legalese involved in licenses, but as it turns out, rolling your own non-legalese license is always a terrible solution. The fact is that these "spirit-of-the-license" licenses can and have been turned against people. There is, however, a very simple solution: A huge pile of well-accepted licenses which do what they're supposed to and actually make sense. If you're aiming for the "all-rights" license, here's the unconditional MIT license: Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. - Gregor Richards
Jun 04 2007
next sibling parent Manfred Nowak <svv1999 hotmail.com> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote

 IN NO EVENT SHALL

I already pointed out, that this might be very dangerous for international usage. In Germany for example this clause is illegal, with the result that the author is liable for _all_ and _everything_ which might be charged to his software. There might be other states, that handle this similar. -manfred
Jun 04 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote:
 bobef wrote:
 LICENSE: use without restrictions at your own risk and responsibility 
 unless this use is resulting (directly or indirectly) harm to any 
 sentient being

Gad I hate being the licensing nazi. Wait, no ... what's that thing that's like hate but is the opposite ... Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly nonsensical.

That sentence could also be interpreted to mean that use of the software is *not* "at your own risk" if you're using the software to harm somebody. So it's at your own risk unless you use it as a gun, and then it's at bobef's risk? --bb
Jun 04 2007
prev sibling parent reply bobef <asd asd.com> writes:
Gregor Richards Wrote:

 Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly nonsensical.
 
 If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they 
 modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their third 
 cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code to their 
 great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's husband, and 
 he works for NASA and decides to give it to his astronaut friend who 
 runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes the life support systems 
 to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's breathing a bit awkward for 
 a minute, I've just violated your license while not even touching your 
 software. 

If you think this is going to be the case, don't give it to your friend. As simple as that ;)
Jun 04 2007
parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
bobef wrote:
 Gregor Richards Wrote:
 
 Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly nonsensical.

 If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they 
 modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their third 
 cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code to their 
 great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's husband, and 
 he works for NASA and decides to give it to his astronaut friend who 
 runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes the life support systems 
 to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's breathing a bit awkward for 
 a minute, I've just violated your license while not even touching your 
 software. 

If you think this is going to be the case, don't give it to your friend. As simple as that ;)

Wow, way to make an "open" license that's not open in the least, and then defend it with a smug, meaningless sentence. "If you think this is going to be the case" means "unless you are psychic", because nobody can truly predict what is going to be done with something they give to a friend. No license which requires its users to be psychic ... hell, no such license even makes any effing sense. - Gregor Richards
Jun 04 2007
parent Alexander Panek <a.panek brainsware.org> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote:
 bobef wrote:
 Gregor Richards Wrote:

 Aside from the poor grammar of the license, it's also fairly 
 nonsensical.

 If I modify your code, and then give it to a friend of mine, and they 
 modify it, and then they give it to somebody else, and then their 
 third cousin twice removed borrows their computer and sends the code 
 to their great-grand-niece's lesbian life partner's dog's groomer's 
 husband, and he works for NASA and decides to give it to his 
 astronaut friend who runs it while in space, and it hangs and causes 
 the life support systems to fail temporarily, which makes somebody's 
 breathing a bit awkward for a minute, I've just violated your license 
 while not even touching your software. 

If you think this is going to be the case, don't give it to your friend. As simple as that ;)

Wow, way to make an "open" license that's not open in the least, and then defend it with a smug, meaningless sentence. "If you think this is going to be the case" means "unless you are psychic", because nobody can truly predict what is going to be done with something they give to a friend. No license which requires its users to be psychic ... hell, no such license even makes any effing sense. - Gregor Richards

Seems like someone missed the point of licenses here. :\ (Apart from looking uber cool in a source file, that is.)
Jun 14 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent reply jcc7 <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:
== Quote from bobef (ads aad.asd)'s article
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower.zip
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower_older.zip
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/thirdparty.zip
 flower.zip is the latest work in progress version using ddl (thanks
 to h3hetic)

 flower_older.zip is few days older back up without ddl, but unlike
 it is working and usable

 thirdparty.zip is dwt,ddl and whatever else is need to compile

 this is absolutely everything, i just zipped the folders. i haven't
 been working on this one for long time now and don't plan to resume
 it (reasons: see my post about the new final scope blah blah stuff
 in the announce newsgroup)

For those that aren't familiar with the "final scope blah blah stuff" topic, I guess the "reasons" that you hint at are containted in these posts: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.announce&article_id=8681 http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.announce&article_id=8686 http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.announce&article_id=8688
 LICENSE: use without restrictions at your own risk and
 responsibility unless this use is resulting (directly or indirectly)
 harm to any sentient being

By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic license. Does "sentient being" include insects? I want to make sure I'm covered in case I print out a couple of pages of code and my friend uses them to swat at flies. Of course, I guess my friend could also turn a page of code into a paper airline and poke someone in the eye, so I suppose it's hard for me to be sure that I don't violate the license.
Jun 04 2007
parent reply bobef <asd asd.com> writes:
jcc7 Wrote:

 
 By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic
license.

From my point of view it is already dead. I posted it just because it have some good stuff in there that may be useful to someone. About you flies question - yes, I am pretty sure flies are sentient beings, but if there are few lines of my code on the page and few lines of your code then which code is the reason? Another question - is the code the reason for your friend to kill the fly or the paper, or maybe the reason is in your friend? Is there reason at all? Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really. Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.
Jun 04 2007
next sibling parent "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"bobef" <asd asd.com> wrote in message news:f41pga$cmo$1 digitalmars.com...
 Guys, lets skip the crap.

Alright, then remove all the inane licensing crap from your code.
Jun 04 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
bobef wrote:
 jcc7 Wrote:
 
 By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic
license.

Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really.

Considering that the crap (namely, the ridiculous and highly restrictive license) is coming from your end, I'd question who should be skipping said crap.
 Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with
license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.

Broad categories of uses that this prevents (due to possible indirect damages): * Anything mechanical. * Anything which operates on a device which creates heat (like, oh, Idonno, a computer). * Anything capable of controlling periphery devices which could hypothetically be mechanical and/or create heat and/or have any form of radiation (heat, light, nuclear, whatever). * Anything which encourages the use of a keyboard, which a fly or other small insect could become trapped in inadvertantly. * Anything which exists in a physical universe with a timeline following basic laws of causality. Oh right, and there's only one redistribution license that would be legal under yours. Here it is: Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders> Permission is not granted, and is explicitly disallowed, regardless of fees or charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to use it in any manner, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software. - Gregor Richards
Jun 04 2007
prev sibling parent reply Don Clugston <dac nospam.com.au> writes:
bobef wrote:
 jcc7 Wrote:
 
 By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic
license.

From my point of view it is already dead. I posted it just because it have some good stuff in there that may be useful to someone. About you flies question - yes, I am pretty sure flies are sentient beings, but if there are few lines of my code on the page and few lines of your code then which code is the reason? Another question - is the code the reason for your friend to kill the fly or the paper, or maybe the reason is in your friend? Is there reason at all? Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really. Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.

I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical behaviour is not the right approach... Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like: "the author requests that ..." and put it under a standard license.
Jun 05 2007
next sibling parent reply bobef <asd asd.com> writes:
Don Clugston Wrote:

 
 I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical 
 behaviour is not the right approach...
 Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
 "the author requests that ..."
 and put it under a standard license.

I see no lawyers in the whole thing. Looking at my English dictionary I understand the word "license" as "the author requests that ...". I haven't mentioned lawyers, have I? If you think of how this legal nonsense (because the state it is today is real madness in my opinion) begun it was just that. People *agreed* to follow some common rules. Today nobody agrees anything. Everybody is just forced, assuming that he agreed to be forced... Anyway... If it sounds "legal" to you- fine. "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"
Jun 05 2007
next sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <georg nospam.org> writes:
bobef wrote:
 "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not
 used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"

:-) I'd love to see a lawyer have you or the opposition define sentient. It's such a shame that things perfectly clear to us, can and will be picked up, wrigled beyond recongition, hashed and shaken, and then fed to ourselves from the rear. No wonder many intelligent people find the innards of a computer the only sane and safe place on earth. Not to mention, I've actually met a couple of persons who really seem to think they are the only living entity sentient. Having them in the courtroom in this case makes for a Broadway play, anytime.
Jun 13 2007
parent Deewiant <deewiant.doesnotlike.spam gmail.com> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:
 Not to mention, I've actually met a couple of persons who really seem to
 think they are the only living entity sentient.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism Unconditional solipsists really exist? I'm enough of a philosopher to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think it's very likely...
Jun 14 2007
prev sibling parent reply BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to bobef,

 Don Clugston Wrote:
 
 I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce
 ethical
 behaviour is not the right approach...
 Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like:
 "the author requests that ..."
 and put it under a standard license.

I understand the word "license" as "the author requests that ...". I haven't mentioned lawyers, have I? If you think of how this legal nonsense (because the state it is today is real madness in my opinion) begun it was just that. People *agreed* to follow some common rules. Today nobody agrees anything. Everybody is just forced, assuming that he agreed to be forced... Anyway... If it sounds "legal" to you- fine. "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result harm to anyone or anything sentient"

"I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used in a way that will result [in] (harm to anyone) or (anything sentient)" What I can't use your front-end in a Turing class AI?
Jun 14 2007
parent reply "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"BCS" <ao pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:ce0a3343b0638c97c93a9a049da news.digitalmars.com...
 "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not used 
 in a way that will result [in] (harm to anyone) or (anything sentient)"

 What I can't use your front-end in a Turing class AI?

Nice interpretation ;)
Jun 14 2007
parent BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to Jarrett,

 "BCS" <ao pathlink.com> wrote in message
 news:ce0a3343b0638c97c93a9a049da news.digitalmars.com...
 
 "I (the author) am requesting that the source code I provide is not
 used in a way that will result [in] (harm to anyone) or (anything
 sentient)"
 
 What I can't use your front-end in a Turing class AI?
 


That is one of the few reasons to like natural languages. They are fun to abuse. ;b
Jun 14 2007
prev sibling parent Leandro Lucarella <llucax gmail.com> writes:
Don Clugston, el  5 de junio a las 09:15 me escribiste:
 bobef wrote:
jcc7 Wrote:
By the way, the flower may very well die on the vine with such a cryptic
license.

pretty sure flies are sentient beings, but if there are few lines of my code on the page and few lines of your code then which code is the reason? Another question - is the code the reason for your friend to kill the fly or the paper, or maybe the reason is in your friend? Is there reason at all? Guys, lets skip the crap. If you find the code useful - use it for good. Or don't. I don't care really. Just don't use it to make a flies exterminating piece software or library with license that allows it to be used in flies exterminating software.

I admire your sentiment, but I think that using lawyers to enforce ethical behaviour is not the right approach... Better to avoid the legal language, and say something like: "the author requests that ..." and put it under a standard license.

Maybe he should try (and modify/extend?) BOLA[1] =) [1] http://auriga.wearlab.de/~alb/bola/ -- LUCA - Leandro Lucarella - Usando Debian GNU/Linux Sid - GNU Generation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ E-Mail / JID: luca lugmen.org.ar GPG Fingerprint: D9E1 4545 0F4B 7928 E82C 375D 4B02 0FE0 B08B 4FB2 GPG Key: gpg --keyserver pks.lugmen.org.ar --recv-keys B08B4FB2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Si ella es el sol, yo soy la luna Si ella es el mar, soy el desierto Y estamos en eclipse total Y estamos en eclipse total
Jun 05 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Jan Claeys <usenet janc.be> writes:
Op Mon, 04 Jun 2007 21:11:45 -0700
schreef Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org>:

 Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>
 
 Permission is not granted, and is explicitly disallowed, regardless
 of fees or charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software
 and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to use it in any 
 manner, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, 
 merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the
 Software.

A shorter version of that is: "". ;-) -- Jan Claeys
Jun 05 2007
prev sibling parent "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
"bobef" <ads aad.asd> wrote in message news:f40auh$pfk$1 digitalmars.com...
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower.zip
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/flower_older.zip
 http://www.flowerplatform.com/files/thirdparty.zip

Uh, the homepage of that site has gone down. http://www.flowerplatform.com/ Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Stewart.
Jun 05 2007