Menu
▾
▴
notion-devel
|
From: Domingo G. <gom...@ho...> - 2010-04-15 07:47:38
|
Hi to everybody,One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the license as it is.Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have a roadmap.This is totally secondary and moreover, I still think that the license is fair (otherwise I wouldn't use Ion).Cheers,Ruinator _________________________________________________________________ Tus datos personales, más seguros con Internet Explorer 8. http://www.microsoft.com/spain/windows/internet-explorer/default.aspx |
|
From: Aron G. <agr...@n0...> - 2010-04-15 15:37:27
|
Domingo Gomez wrote: [Thu Apr 15 2010, 03:47:31AM EDT] > One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the > license as it is. > Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have a > roadmap. The current license can cause problems for distro inclusion, as it has already in the past. IMHO distro inclusion is important so people don't need to always install from source, rather we can eventually "aptitude install notion" Aron |
|
From: ebik <eb...@dr...> - 2010-04-16 20:15:54
|
I'm now lazy to check the license, but AFAIK, the situation will be totally different. The license prohibits the distributions to patch it by themselves and name it /ion/. Now when the project's name will not be /ion/, is there any problem with the license? Debian includes not only GPL-license, but also BSD-license, Apache-license, Perl-license, and so on. I think that the license is also "free" as long as the project's name is not /ion/. Please correct me if I understand it bad. On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:38:07 -0400 Aron Griffis <agr...@n0...> wrote: > Domingo Gomez wrote: [Thu Apr 15 2010, 03:47:31AM EDT] > > One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the > > license as it is. > > Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have > > a roadmap. > > The current license can cause problems for distro inclusion, as > it has already in the past. IMHO distro inclusion is important so > people don't need to always install from source, rather we can > eventually "aptitude install notion" > > Aron > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Notion-devel mailing list > Not...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > -- Tomáš 'ebík' Ebenlendr PF 2010.29017703577 |
|
From: Domingo G. <gom...@ho...> - 2010-04-19 07:54:46
|
I agree. That's what Tuomo has always said, as long as you don't useion, it's just GPL. One related thing, distro inclusion is not what the users right now want.Everybody here has installed from source and I don't think any common ubuntuuser want to install it anyway. > Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:01:55 +0200 > From: eb...@dr... > To: not...@li... > Subject: Re: [Notion-devel] One question > > I'm now lazy to check the license, but AFAIK, the situation will be > totally different. The license prohibits the distributions to patch > it by themselves and name it /ion/. Now when the project's name will > not be /ion/, is there any problem with the license? Debian includes > not only GPL-license, but also BSD-license, Apache-license, > Perl-license, and so on. I think that the license is also "free" as long > as the project's name is not /ion/. Please correct me if I understand > it bad. > > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:38:07 -0400 > Aron Griffis <agr...@n0...> wrote: > > > Domingo Gomez wrote: [Thu Apr 15 2010, 03:47:31AM EDT] > > > One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the > > > license as it is. > > > Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have > > > a roadmap. > > > > The current license can cause problems for distro inclusion, as > > it has already in the past. IMHO distro inclusion is important so > > people don't need to always install from source, rather we can > > eventually "aptitude install notion" > > > > Aron > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > > _______________________________________________ > > Notion-devel mailing list > > Not...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > > > > -- > Tomáš 'ebík' Ebenlendr > PF 2010.29017703577 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Notion-devel mailing list > Not...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel _________________________________________________________________ Recibe un SMS de tu Hotmail vayas donde vayas. ¡Date de alta! http://home.mobile.live.com/MobileAttach.mvc/?mkt=es-es |
|
From: Juri H. <ju...@fa...> - 2010-04-19 10:44:19
|
Domingo Gomez schrieb: > I agree. That's what Tuomo has always said, as long as you don't use > ion, it's just GPL. > Maybe we should contact a distribution Debian, Ubuntu, whatever to make the legal issue clear. I am sure they are more experienced with that and probably have an internal lawyer for things like this. > One related thing, distro inclusion is not what the users right now want. > Everybody here has installed from source and I don't think any common > ubuntu > user want to install it anyway. > > > Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:01:55 +0200 > > From: eb...@dr... > > To: not...@li... > > Subject: Re: [Notion-devel] One question > > > > I'm now lazy to check the license, but AFAIK, the situation will be > > totally different. The license prohibits the distributions to patch > > it by themselves and name it /ion/. Now when the project's name will > > not be /ion/, is there any problem with the license? Debian includes > > not only GPL-license, but also BSD-license, Apache-license, > > Perl-license, and so on. I think that the license is also "free" as long > > as the project's name is not /ion/. Please correct me if I understand > > it bad. |
|
From: Stéphane M. <ste...@gm...> - 2010-04-19 10:22:56
|
Hi, As a "common" (maybe not so) FC user, I'd like to see Notion integrated to my distro, as currently, I have nearly no time to custom it. I loved to use Ion in the past, but had some difficulties to walk through before I get it works. Since I had to change my computer, I do not use it anymore. Best regards. 2010/4/19 Domingo Gomez <gom...@ho...> > I agree. That's what Tuomo has always said, as long as you don't use > ion, it's just GPL. > > One related thing, distro inclusion is not what the users right now want. > Everybody here has installed from source and I don't think any common > ubuntu > user want to install it anyway. > > > > Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:01:55 +0200 > > From: eb...@dr... > > To: not...@li... > > Subject: Re: [Notion-devel] One question > > > > I'm now lazy to check the license, but AFAIK, the situation will be > > totally different. The license prohibits the distributions to patch > > it by themselves and name it /ion/. Now when the project's name will > > not be /ion/, is there any problem with the license? Debian includes > > not only GPL-license, but also BSD-license, Apache-license, > > Perl-license, and so on. I think that the license is also "free" as long > > as the project's name is not /ion/. Please correct me if I understand > > it bad. > > > > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:38:07 -0400 > > Aron Griffis <agr...@n0...> wrote: > > > > > Domingo Gomez wrote: [Thu Apr 15 2010, 03:47:31AM EDT] > > > > One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the > > > > license as it is. > > > > Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have > > > > a roadmap. > > > > > > The current license can cause problems for distro inclusion, as > > > it has already in the past. IMHO distro inclusion is important so > > > people don't need to always install from source, rather we can > > > eventually "aptitude install notion" > > > > > > Aron > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > > > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > > > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > > > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Notion-devel mailing list > > > Not...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > > > > > > > > -- > > Tomáš 'ebík' Ebenlendr > > PF 2010.29017703577 > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > > _______________________________________________ > > Notion-devel mailing list > > Not...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > ------------------------------ > ¡Lucha por tus ídolos o hunde al personajes que quieras! ¡Vota a favor o en > contra de los más famosos! ¡Nuevo MSN Populus!<http://populus.es.msn.com/> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Notion-devel mailing list > Not...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > |
|
From: kevin g. <kev...@gm...> - 2010-04-19 15:34:28
|
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Domingo Gomez <gom...@ho...> wrote: > I agree. That's what Tuomo has always said, as long as you don't use > ion, it's just GPL. Right, which is part of the assumption that he isn't "hostile" to the fork, but I'd be very much happier about things if we could proceed with a completely clear conscience regarding the license, which means complying with it as-written as well as as-intended. > One related thing, distro inclusion is not what the users right now want. > Everybody here has installed from source and I don't think any common ubuntu > user want to install it anyway. 1. I'm a user, and I DO want distro inclusion. I'm definitely up to building from source (have done so on several different platforms) and even fixing problems in makefiles, lua, and c, but that doesn't mean I want to manually build from source every time I want to install the program. 2. It's not a matter of whether we want to push for distro inclusion NOW, but whether we will ever want to do so. If we proceed without addressing the license issues properly, we could end up with a lot of work put into a fork that will never be able to progress beyond the audience of technical users who are willing to build from source. Kevin Granade > >> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:01:55 +0200 >> From: eb...@dr... >> To: not...@li... >> Subject: Re: [Notion-devel] One question >> >> I'm now lazy to check the license, but AFAIK, the situation will be >> totally different. The license prohibits the distributions to patch >> it by themselves and name it /ion/. Now when the project's name will >> not be /ion/, is there any problem with the license? Debian includes >> not only GPL-license, but also BSD-license, Apache-license, >> Perl-license, and so on. I think that the license is also "free" as long >> as the project's name is not /ion/. Please correct me if I understand >> it bad. >> >> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:38:07 -0400 >> Aron Griffis <agr...@n0...> wrote: >> >> > Domingo Gomez wrote: [Thu Apr 15 2010, 03:47:31AM EDT] >> > > One question, I still don't understand what happens if we keep the >> > > license as it is. >> > > Okay, it is not GPL, but the only thing that's important is to have >> > > a roadmap. >> > >> > The current license can cause problems for distro inclusion, as >> > it has already in the past. IMHO distro inclusion is important so >> > people don't need to always install from source, rather we can >> > eventually "aptitude install notion" >> > >> > Aron >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval >> > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs >> > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. >> > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. >> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Notion-devel mailing list >> > Not...@li... >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel >> > >> >> >> -- >> Tomáš 'ebík' Ebenlendr >> PF 2010.29017703577 >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval >> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs >> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. >> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> Notion-devel mailing list >> Not...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > ________________________________ > ¡Lucha por tus ídolos o hunde al personajes que quieras! ¡Vota a favor o en > contra de los más famosos! ¡Nuevo MSN Populus! > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Notion-devel mailing list > Not...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/notion-devel > > |
|
From: Nick M. <ni...@ni...> - 2010-04-19 16:58:21
|
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:34:20AM -0500, kevin granade wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Domingo Gomez <gom...@ho...> wrote: > > I agree. That's what Tuomo has always said, as long as you don't use > > ion, it's just GPL. > > Right, which is part of the assumption that he isn't "hostile" to the > fork, but I'd be very much happier about things if we could proceed > with a completely clear conscience regarding the license, which means > complying with it as-written as well as as-intended. > > > One related thing, distro inclusion is not what the users right now want. > > Everybody here has installed from source and I don't think any common ubuntu > > user want to install it anyway. > > 1. I'm a user, and I DO want distro inclusion. I'm definitely up to > building from source (have done so on several different platforms) and > even fixing problems in makefiles, lua, and c, but that doesn't mean I > want to manually build from source every time I want to install the > program. > > 2. It's not a matter of whether we want to push for distro inclusion > NOW, but whether we will ever want to do so. If we proceed without > addressing the license issues properly, we could end up with a lot of > work put into a fork that will never be able to progress beyond the > audience of technical users who are willing to build from source. > > Kevin Granade > Completely agree on both accounts here. Aside from the distro inclusion issues, it's also about whether users themselves will want to run non-free software. Most people I know with the skills to build from source wouldn't. IMO branching from the last time ion3 was pure (L)GPL is the only sensible option here. Nick |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X