I propose to move the discussion of TOra forking/project continuation in this separate thread. This is mainly because there are two discussion threads currently running about the same thing.
As for the subject - personally I would prefer to fork and call the project differently. I have dealt with the Quest before and I can't say that I liked their over-posessive attituted towards the products they do. That is to say that I would rather fork it now and forget about Quest altogether (apart from copyright comments) than would leave a chance for them to find some legal stunt later and do some damage to the project. This way we can ensure that we have GPL only licensing in the product and prevent any leagal issues from the Quest's side (if there are any possible). I urge other people to share their thoughts on this matter.
Question to Nathan Neulinger - 'nneu': have you by anay chance managed to get a reply from SF guys as to when we can have the CVS copy of the repository (if we'll be creating a fork)?
Also I would be happy to do a development of TOra and would like to have myself enrolled as developer in a forthcoming team of developers. I am not that experienced in managing/administrating SF projects so I think (from all the emails) the Nathan 'nneu' so far would be a best candidate for that.
FYI: nneul not nneu.
Yes, the CVS backup tool actually is already supposed to be wide open to anyone, not just project members, there is a problem of some sort that is causing the page to fail. The SF guys will get me one by hand if they can't get the web page bug fixed, but they were going to escalate that to get it corrected.
Henrik has been very supportive of either approach at this point, so I am inclined to see what Quest's official response is. He asked me to wait a few days to let them give an official answer. If they are not open to fully handing over admin of the project to a new set of developers, then we'll take the fork route, otherwise we'll continue here simply for a smoother transition. Let's give them till next week. I figure there are three possible responses:
* Very negative, not willing - answer is easy, fork and continue
* Here it is, have fun - adjust project member list, web page, etc. and start things moving
* Wishy-washy, want to retain admin rights/fingers in the pie, etc. - not sure on this one, probably a group consensus at that point whether to fork or not.
As for developers, I'm definately looking to have as many active participants as possible to give this project a kick-in-the-rear so to speak, especially so we can get some momentum going for when the GPL'd Qt/Win release is available. About the only thing I feel very strongly about with group development is that there be good open communication for any controversial patches.
FYI, the cvs backup thing is working again...
Ok, I've had a very good (As in the result, the food was just from the foodcoutt ;) ) lunch with my project manager and as a result Nathan Neulinger is now a shared project admin of the TOra project. I'll trust you will promoted the people you see fit to developers.
Also I will probably be able to help you guys produce binaries for Windows for the time being until you can port the code to one of the free versions of Qt for Windows. It might take me a couple of days after a release though, I hope you bear with me on that.
Ok, time to start coding away!
Fantastic! I will start on trying to get a new homepage put together shortly.
With respect to the existing and future binary builds (up until the GPL'd Qt/Windows release of course) - do you still intend for the business use license restriction to apply, or can we assume that is no longer an issue? (Or was that a restriction required by the Qt licensing?)
My assumption as far as updates and patches (and this will be codified in the package as soon as I can get things together) is that the individuals will have copyright to their own additions to the software, but that they will grant a limited license to you/Quest to produce binary releases of TOra effective until Qt for Windows is released as GPL and TOra is updated for compatability with Qt4, at which point future versions will no longer need to have that special exception.
I'm not making any promises on that, but I (personally) don't really see this as a big issue since with or without my help there probably will be a Windows binary sooner or later and it's basically just a matter of support for the current commercial userbase for the time being and no one is interested at Quest in selling more TOra licenses. So I think it can be made free (As in beer for now until the free Qt is available).
Again, this is my personal opinion, but this was the vibe I got from the meeting today (One of the main selling points was a very angry TOra user having called Quest and complained about being forced to TOAD). So I'm not making any guarantees (And I might be doing other stuff so it can take a while to produce the binary too).
I don't think there is an issue here with the respect to the licenses. The current copyright does not forbid compilation and usage of the TOra with QT-Free edition for Windows (that was non-exiting in version QT-3). Now when there is a native (non-cygwin) port of QT-Free X11 for Windows we can easily use that until the QT-Free 4 will come out.
What about a developers - how can I enroll to become TOra developer?
It's a very exciting time and I am already dreaming of that day when we can do other ports of TOra (MacOS X with QT-Free comes in mind)!
This is indeed excellent news! Tora development can finally continue..
Count me in!
> FYI: nneul not nneu.
Sorry about that Nathan.
I'd like to add my name to the list of (potential?) developers for this project.
What sort of things would you be interested in working on/etc.?
I'm glad to see development of tora is going on.
I use tora as my main tool for accessing all my databases (oracle, mysql and postgresql).
I'd like to jump in to help development in various places. Especially to further improve postgresql support.
Two questions/remarks to be discussed:
I would appreciate to use the mailing lists as discussion forum. It's much more convenient to follow the threads on a mail client thant having to log in to SF every now and then. Even if the threads will be continued here in the forum, we should leave a message in the mailing lists. I saw this thread and the new development only accidentally.
Regarding version control: Is anyone interested in using subversion instead of CVS? I personally perfer it over CVS, but there is no svn support in SF.
interested in contributing development man hours. not a lot of qt experience, but can help with core issues. do we have a 'QA' type person that can be responsible for reproducing bugs and clarifying. that would be key, save developers a LOT of time!
I'd like to volunteer for the QA position.. I have access to a wide variety of databases, all the way from 8.1.6 to 10.1 and a few *nix platforms as well where I can compile tora to test it. Besides, I love finding and fixing bugs.. :)
sounds like we have a QA guy now! winterchild, I actually already added you to the project based on your previous patch submissions... So anything you can test and find problems with would be great.
PS - i LIKE cvs ;-) hehe
I'll try to help with the italian translation, if you'll release the appropriate files al henrik did.
And of course I'll be happy to test the windows version ;-)
What files do you need? Everything should be in the CVS repository and that should be browseable from the project page.
Some time ago henrik sent out a file to be translated with QT linguist, that's what I mean, I don't remember exactly the file name.
It's most likely this file... If you can send a diff -u that would be great. I'm not actually sure how out of date it is, if you build or run the cvs version and see strings that need translated, here would be the file to update.
Just checked it out yesterday and did some more translation.
How do I do a diff -u exactly?
People interested in translating TOra can find qtlinguist for windows at http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/psi/qtlinguist-3.0.4.zip?download