xmlvm-users — For current and interested XMLVM users, for public discussions and anouncements.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Doug D. <dan...@gm...>]

Just a quick question about XMLVM GPL Licensing. If I were to use XMLVM in a
game project or iphone/android application that I would sell for money on
the iTunes app store or google app store.

Would be acceptable to release all code generated from XMLVM and all
improvements made to XMLVM as GPL source code back to the community (I am
totally for releasing XMLVM improvements and that's what LGPL licensing
does, but the generated code without the rest of the game code may not be
that useful).

My opinion is that contributions to the core XMLVM should be contributed
back to the project (such as adding new API's like OpenGL or networking),
but code specific to your application generated from XMLVM don't need to be
released.

Re: [xmlvm-users] iPhone OpenGL from Java

[Sascha H. <sa...@gm...>]

Hi Kevin,
looks very good. Getting OpenGL going is one if my next tasks as well.
Ideally going from Android OpenGL to the iPhone, which I think should be
possible, as the APIs are similar.

// Sascha

On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Kevin Glass <ke...@co...> wrote:

> I've spent a bit of time adding some support to XMLVM for OpenGL on the
> iPhone. Hopefully that'd let us build 3D iPhone games and apps in Java in
> the future. There's a couple of screen shots of a port of NeHe Lesson 4
> running in the simulator and on the iPhone emulator:
>
> http://www.cokeandcode.com/aboid/nehe4_sim.png
> http://www.cokeandcode.com/aboid/nehe4_emu.png
>
> There's more details of what I had to do and how the GL code ends up
> looking over here:
>
> http://www.cokeandcode.com/node/1400
>
> Hopefully it's of interest to someone. I've supplied a patch a short while
> ago so with luck it can be made available for general use.
>
> Kev
>
> --
> ---
> http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
> http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
> This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
> vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
> the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize
> details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>

[xmlvm-users] iPhone OpenGL from Java

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

I've spent a bit of time adding some support to XMLVM for OpenGL on the
iPhone. Hopefully that'd let us build 3D iPhone games and apps in Java in
the future. There's a couple of screen shots of a port of NeHe Lesson 4
running in the simulator and on the iPhone emulator:

http://www.cokeandcode.com/aboid/nehe4_sim.png
http://www.cokeandcode.com/aboid/nehe4_emu.png

There's more details of what I had to do and how the GL code ends up
looking over here:

http://www.cokeandcode.com/node/1400

Hopefully it's of interest to someone. I've supplied a patch a short while
ago so with luck it can be made available for general use.

Kev

-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Tushar K. <tk...@w3...>]

What is the licensing cost of distributing commercial application written in 
Objective-C. Of course one has to learn the new language and have Apple 
computer, but are there other costs? xmlvm shouldn't cost more than that, I 
think.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Glass" <ke...@co...>
To: <xml...@li...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 3:56 AM
Subject: Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product


> Another possibility might be to apply this:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception
>
> To the compatibility library. That should keep the XMLVM technology under
> your control, making sure that no one can profit off the core technology,
> but allowing end users to make use of the tech.
>
> Kev
>
> -- 
> ---
> http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
> http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
> This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
> vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
> the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full 
> prize
> details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/blackberry
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users 

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

Another possibility might be to apply this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception

To the compatibility library. That should keep the XMLVM technology under
your control, making sure that no one can profit off the core technology,
but allowing end users to make use of the tech.

Kev

-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Inderjeet S. <ind...@gm...>]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Kevin Glass<ke...@co...> wrote:
> That's a real shame, it essentially limits your user base substantially
> since the majority of users are likely to be wanting to port existing
> android applications to iphone.

Well that is what I was thinking too regarding my application. But
after some experimentation, I realized that I wanted a different GUI
for the iPhone app, and (somewhat) nicely written Objective C code and
was willing to update it myself.

Besides, XMLVM is there to address the usecases that you are talking
about. java2objc is in somewhat other space of helping people migrate
their code.

Inderjeet

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Inderjeet S. <ind...@gm...>]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Arno Puder<ar...@pu...> wrote:
>
> I understand that this is a touchy issue and there are arguments for and
> against either way. In my earlier days I began an Open Source CORBA
> implementation called MICO (mico.org). Very early on there was a similar
> request to change the license for MICO from GPL to LGPL. Since we complied,
> that surely spurred commercial usage. What made me a little bit sad is that
> we never received anything in return from those companies. When we asked
> them for a simple endorsement (we didn't even ask for funding back then), we
> got no reply. The only company ever to acknowledge that they used MICO was
> the Weather Channel.
>
> Quite frankly, if you plan to use XMLVM in a purely Open Source project, why
> is the type of Open Source license important? Inder mentioned that he just
> wants to tinker with the project and he is basically by himself. I wonder
> why GPL isn't good enough for this.

GPL doesn't work even for applications that I give away for free.
Since GPL requires that I open-source my application code under the
same license. I am not willing to do so in this case.


> Don't get me wrong. I certainly would like to see XMLVM grow and thrive. But
> at the same time I don't want to give in as easily as I did with MICO. I
> still believe it is only fair to give something in return. Open Source
> developers do (through their work) but companies often only take but never
> give back (never mind the handful of high-profile Open Source projects).

Sure, I understand your concerns and would respect the decision you
make. All I am saying is that there is need for such a project for
commercial applications, and if you prohibit it, other solutions will
emerge.


> What is a good way to 'encourage' a company to return to the Open Source
> community?

Are you open to non-monetary contributions? For example, I would be
open to merging my code for java2objc project with xmlvm if you guys
were open to changing your license and were interesting in using
bits-and-pieces of my code. (Technically, you are welcome to take my
code and use it anyway since I am releasing it under ASL. But in the
other case, I will also be happy to contribute some integration
effort). Also, if you did open up your license, people like me could
use it and may be contribute with our programming skills.

Regarding monetary contributions: can you come up with a scheme around
services and support? May be larger companies who are developing
mobile games will bite?

Thanks
Inder

Re: [xmlvm-users] Contributions

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

Forgot to include a link to the stuff I've been doing:

http://www.cokeandcode.com/aboidblog

Awesome XMLVM at work!

Kev

> Hi all,
>
> First thanks for all the great work on XMLVM. I've been working with it
> for the past few weeks and it's got me totally inspired :)
>
> I've been extending pieces here and there where I've needed to support my
> games. I was wondering how I'd go about contributing this back to you?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Kev
> --
> ---
> http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
> http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>


-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

In general I think the main way to grab company endorsement is for them to
adopt your project to such an extent that adding features and fixing bugs
for you is in their interest. At which point the investment you get is in
time/labour from their workers.

However, I do see your point. Maybe there's some other middle ground we
could find. For instance, I'm a single developer (I work on several open
source Java projects related to gaming), however I'd like to publish games
to the iPhone market and sell them on. I'd love to fund you guys but I
don't imagine I'd ever make enough money from iPhone games to make it
worth any of our times. I'm more than happy to spend my time
adding/contributing to XMLVM (see my other email).

One thing to note I suppose for anyone commercially interested is that
under GPL only the code linked to the GPL code needs to be released. So,
only the generated ObjC assuming it's linked to the compatibility library
needs to be made available.

Unfortunately if people are reluctant to pick XMLVM because they can't
sell their applications into the iPhone market - then it's unlikely to
gather enough momentum to get large scale company buy in.

Maybe some sort of indie development license that gets people to pay back
a proportion of any sales to the project in exchange the rights to
distribute it?

In a perfect world if you use it, you'd contribute but I've also
experienced the direct opposite. The last thing I think anyone would want
to see is a bunch of projects attempting to do the exact same thing simply
for licensing purposes.

So I guess:

Could we come up with some sort of commercial license that would make it
possible for indies like myself to make some money while still
contributing some cash back to the project?

Or maybe the license for the distributable part of the library (the
compatibility library) could be lessoned, or commercially licensed in some
indie friendly way?

Could you also clear up whether your intention is make generated source
code covered by the GPL? I don't think that's actually legal use of the
license (since the output isn't derivative work) but if it's your
intention I surely don't want to break it.

I actually have some stuff that's close to ready to go so I'd be really
interested in what you'd like to do here. I can make the objc source
available to the game (and just not supply art resources etc) but I'd
really rather not :)

Kev

PS. Sorry for the long mail, quite a complicated subject.

>
> I understand that this is a touchy issue and there are arguments for and
> against either way. In my earlier days I began an Open Source CORBA
> implementation called MICO (mico.org). Very early on there was a similar
> request to change the license for MICO from GPL to LGPL. Since we
> complied, that surely spurred commercial usage. What made me a little
> bit sad is that we never received anything in return from those
> companies. When we asked them for a simple endorsement (we didn't even
> ask for funding back then), we got no reply. The only company ever to
> acknowledge that they used MICO was the Weather Channel.
>
> Quite frankly, if you plan to use XMLVM in a purely Open Source project,
> why is the type of Open Source license important? Inder mentioned that
> he just wants to tinker with the project and he is basically by himself.
> I wonder why GPL isn't good enough for this.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I certainly would like to see XMLVM grow and thrive.
> But at the same time I don't want to give in as easily as I did with
> MICO. I still believe it is only fair to give something in return. Open
> Source developers do (through their work) but companies often only take
> but never give back (never mind the handful of high-profile Open Source
> projects).
>
> What is a good way to 'encourage' a company to return to the Open Source
> community?
>
> Arno
>
>
> Kevin Glass wrote:
>> That's a real shame, it essentially limits your user base substantially
>> since the majority of users are likely to be wanting to port existing
>> android applications to iphone.
>>
>> Couple of questions around this:
>>
>> 1) The tool itself is GPL, but does that license cover the output? GCC
>> for
>> instance might be GPL but that doesn't make the object code it produces
>> GPL.
>>
>> 2) Presumably the objective C compatibility library is also licensed
>> under
>> GPL. Is there any chance you'd consider licensing just that part under a
>> more permissive license. This way no one could resell XMLVM but the
>> output
>> would be usable in a commercial sense.
>>
>> 3) If a user were to develop a new compatibility library (say me) and
>> use
>> this instead of the existing GPL one, would you consider that library
>> linked with the output of the tool to be free of GPL?
>>
>> Unfortunately it's just going to drive a bunch of copy cat projects as
>> described below if there's isn't some mutually beneficial solution. This
>> would be negative for both sides, no open source contributions for the
>> project and duplicated effort all round.
>>
>> Kev
>>
>>> Hi Arno,
>>>
>>> I would love to support your project but I am an individual with
>>> limited means who is trying to convert one of my Android applications
>>> into an iPhone app. This is more as a hobby so I am not expecting to
>>> make much money here.
>>>
>>> Your choice of GPL (not LGPL) probably hinders the broader use of your
>>> technologies. I have created a bunch of open-source projects and
>>> always chose BSD or Apache-style licensing. I humbly recommend that
>>> you reconsider your choice of license.
>>>
>>> In any case, since I did not hear back from you in time, I went ahead
>>> and created another open-source project that  provides a Java to
>>> Objective C code-converter. See http://code.google.com/p/java2objc/
>>> for my project. My goal here is somewhat different from yours. I
>>> intend to generate Objective C source-code as if a competent
>>> programmer would have written it. This is at the expense of providing
>>> complete and accurate transformation which (I think) xmlvm strives to
>>> provide.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Inder
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Arno Puder<ar...@pu...> wrote:
>>>> Inderjeet,
>>>>
>>>> both GPL and L-GPL require you to submit any
>>>> modifications/enhancements/fixes you make to XMLVM back to us. Both
>>>> licenses
>>>> allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. However, the GPL also
>>>> requires you to make your own application available under the GPL
>>>> license if
>>>> you link the XMLVM libraries to your application. Most likely this is
>>>> not
>>>> what you had in mind if you want to use XMLVM for a commercial product
>>>> (this
>>>> requirement basically limits your business model to services around
>>>> your
>>>> product).
>>>>
>>>> We put a lot of efforts in making XMLVM. May I suggest an alternative:
>>>> we
>>>> are willing to grant you a commercial license for XMLVM that would
>>>> allow
>>>> you
>>>> to use XMLVM in a commercial product. This commercial license would
>>>> not
>>>> require you to publish your own source code under an Open Source
>>>> license. In
>>>> return for the commercial license, you give us some funding to enhance
>>>> XMLVM. This is the essence of dual-licensing (releasing source code
>>>> under
>>>> two different licenses: an Open Source as well as a commercial
>>>> license).
>>>> Considering all the work that already went into XMLVM, I think this is
>>>> a
>>>> fair trade. What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Arno
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Inderjeet Singh wrote:
>>>>> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
>>>>> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
>>>>> iPhone ones.
>>>>>
>>>>> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
>>>>> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider
>>>>> making
>>>>> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
>>>>> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Inderjeet
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>>>>> xml...@li...
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>>> xml...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Arno P. <ar...@pu...>]

I understand that this is a touchy issue and there are arguments for and 
against either way. In my earlier days I began an Open Source CORBA 
implementation called MICO (mico.org). Very early on there was a similar 
request to change the license for MICO from GPL to LGPL. Since we 
complied, that surely spurred commercial usage. What made me a little 
bit sad is that we never received anything in return from those 
companies. When we asked them for a simple endorsement (we didn't even 
ask for funding back then), we got no reply. The only company ever to 
acknowledge that they used MICO was the Weather Channel.

Quite frankly, if you plan to use XMLVM in a purely Open Source project, 
why is the type of Open Source license important? Inder mentioned that 
he just wants to tinker with the project and he is basically by himself. 
I wonder why GPL isn't good enough for this.

Don't get me wrong. I certainly would like to see XMLVM grow and thrive. 
But at the same time I don't want to give in as easily as I did with 
MICO. I still believe it is only fair to give something in return. Open 
Source developers do (through their work) but companies often only take 
but never give back (never mind the handful of high-profile Open Source 
projects).

What is a good way to 'encourage' a company to return to the Open Source 
community?

Arno


Kevin Glass wrote:
> That's a real shame, it essentially limits your user base substantially
> since the majority of users are likely to be wanting to port existing
> android applications to iphone.
> 
> Couple of questions around this:
> 
> 1) The tool itself is GPL, but does that license cover the output? GCC for
> instance might be GPL but that doesn't make the object code it produces
> GPL.
> 
> 2) Presumably the objective C compatibility library is also licensed under
> GPL. Is there any chance you'd consider licensing just that part under a
> more permissive license. This way no one could resell XMLVM but the output
> would be usable in a commercial sense.
> 
> 3) If a user were to develop a new compatibility library (say me) and use
> this instead of the existing GPL one, would you consider that library
> linked with the output of the tool to be free of GPL?
> 
> Unfortunately it's just going to drive a bunch of copy cat projects as
> described below if there's isn't some mutually beneficial solution. This
> would be negative for both sides, no open source contributions for the
> project and duplicated effort all round.
> 
> Kev
> 
>> Hi Arno,
>>
>> I would love to support your project but I am an individual with
>> limited means who is trying to convert one of my Android applications
>> into an iPhone app. This is more as a hobby so I am not expecting to
>> make much money here.
>>
>> Your choice of GPL (not LGPL) probably hinders the broader use of your
>> technologies. I have created a bunch of open-source projects and
>> always chose BSD or Apache-style licensing. I humbly recommend that
>> you reconsider your choice of license.
>>
>> In any case, since I did not hear back from you in time, I went ahead
>> and created another open-source project that  provides a Java to
>> Objective C code-converter. See http://code.google.com/p/java2objc/
>> for my project. My goal here is somewhat different from yours. I
>> intend to generate Objective C source-code as if a competent
>> programmer would have written it. This is at the expense of providing
>> complete and accurate transformation which (I think) xmlvm strives to
>> provide.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Inder
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Arno Puder<ar...@pu...> wrote:
>>> Inderjeet,
>>>
>>> both GPL and L-GPL require you to submit any
>>> modifications/enhancements/fixes you make to XMLVM back to us. Both
>>> licenses
>>> allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. However, the GPL also
>>> requires you to make your own application available under the GPL
>>> license if
>>> you link the XMLVM libraries to your application. Most likely this is
>>> not
>>> what you had in mind if you want to use XMLVM for a commercial product
>>> (this
>>> requirement basically limits your business model to services around your
>>> product).
>>>
>>> We put a lot of efforts in making XMLVM. May I suggest an alternative:
>>> we
>>> are willing to grant you a commercial license for XMLVM that would allow
>>> you
>>> to use XMLVM in a commercial product. This commercial license would not
>>> require you to publish your own source code under an Open Source
>>> license. In
>>> return for the commercial license, you give us some funding to enhance
>>> XMLVM. This is the essence of dual-licensing (releasing source code
>>> under
>>> two different licenses: an Open Source as well as a commercial license).
>>> Considering all the work that already went into XMLVM, I think this is a
>>> fair trade. What do you think?
>>>
>>> Arno
>>>
>>>
>>> Inderjeet Singh wrote:
>>>> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
>>>> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
>>>> iPhone ones.
>>>>
>>>> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
>>>> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
>>>> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
>>>> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Inderjeet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>>>> xml...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>> xml...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>
> 
> 

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Arno P. <ar...@pu...>]

Inderjeet,

both GPL and L-GPL require you to submit any 
modifications/enhancements/fixes you make to XMLVM back to us. Both 
licenses allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. However, the 
GPL also requires you to make your own application available under the 
GPL license if you link the XMLVM libraries to your application. Most 
likely this is not what you had in mind if you want to use XMLVM for a 
commercial product (this requirement basically limits your business 
model to services around your product).

We put a lot of efforts in making XMLVM. May I suggest an alternative: 
we are willing to grant you a commercial license for XMLVM that would 
allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. This commercial license 
would not require you to publish your own source code under an Open 
Source license. In return for the commercial license, you give us some 
funding to enhance XMLVM. This is the essence of dual-licensing 
(releasing source code under two different licenses: an Open Source as 
well as a commercial license). Considering all the work that already 
went into XMLVM, I think this is a fair trade. What do you think?

Arno


Inderjeet Singh wrote:
> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
> iPhone ones.
> 
> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
> 
> Thanks
> Inderjeet
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

That's a real shame, it essentially limits your user base substantially
since the majority of users are likely to be wanting to port existing
android applications to iphone.

Couple of questions around this:

1) The tool itself is GPL, but does that license cover the output? GCC for
instance might be GPL but that doesn't make the object code it produces
GPL.

2) Presumably the objective C compatibility library is also licensed under
GPL. Is there any chance you'd consider licensing just that part under a
more permissive license. This way no one could resell XMLVM but the output
would be usable in a commercial sense.

3) If a user were to develop a new compatibility library (say me) and use
this instead of the existing GPL one, would you consider that library
linked with the output of the tool to be free of GPL?

Unfortunately it's just going to drive a bunch of copy cat projects as
described below if there's isn't some mutually beneficial solution. This
would be negative for both sides, no open source contributions for the
project and duplicated effort all round.

Kev

> Hi Arno,
>
> I would love to support your project but I am an individual with
> limited means who is trying to convert one of my Android applications
> into an iPhone app. This is more as a hobby so I am not expecting to
> make much money here.
>
> Your choice of GPL (not LGPL) probably hinders the broader use of your
> technologies. I have created a bunch of open-source projects and
> always chose BSD or Apache-style licensing. I humbly recommend that
> you reconsider your choice of license.
>
> In any case, since I did not hear back from you in time, I went ahead
> and created another open-source project that  provides a Java to
> Objective C code-converter. See http://code.google.com/p/java2objc/
> for my project. My goal here is somewhat different from yours. I
> intend to generate Objective C source-code as if a competent
> programmer would have written it. This is at the expense of providing
> complete and accurate transformation which (I think) xmlvm strives to
> provide.
>
> Thanks
> Inder
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Arno Puder<ar...@pu...> wrote:
>>
>> Inderjeet,
>>
>> both GPL and L-GPL require you to submit any
>> modifications/enhancements/fixes you make to XMLVM back to us. Both
>> licenses
>> allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. However, the GPL also
>> requires you to make your own application available under the GPL
>> license if
>> you link the XMLVM libraries to your application. Most likely this is
>> not
>> what you had in mind if you want to use XMLVM for a commercial product
>> (this
>> requirement basically limits your business model to services around your
>> product).
>>
>> We put a lot of efforts in making XMLVM. May I suggest an alternative:
>> we
>> are willing to grant you a commercial license for XMLVM that would allow
>> you
>> to use XMLVM in a commercial product. This commercial license would not
>> require you to publish your own source code under an Open Source
>> license. In
>> return for the commercial license, you give us some funding to enhance
>> XMLVM. This is the essence of dual-licensing (releasing source code
>> under
>> two different licenses: an Open Source as well as a commercial license).
>> Considering all the work that already went into XMLVM, I think this is a
>> fair trade. What do you think?
>>
>> Arno
>>
>>
>> Inderjeet Singh wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
>>> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
>>> iPhone ones.
>>>
>>> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
>>> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
>>> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
>>> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Inderjeet
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>>> xml...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>


-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

[xmlvm-users] Contributions

[Kevin G. <ke...@co...>]

Hi all,

First thanks for all the great work on XMLVM. I've been working with it
for the past few weeks and it's got me totally inspired :)

I've been extending pieces here and there where I've needed to support my
games. I was wondering how I'd go about contributing this back to you?

Thanks again,

Kev
-- 
---
http://www.tiltilation.com - ball rolling fun
http://www.cokeandcode.com - games, code, tutorials and other great stuff.

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Inderjeet S. <ind...@gm...>]

Hi Arno,

I would love to support your project but I am an individual with
limited means who is trying to convert one of my Android applications
into an iPhone app. This is more as a hobby so I am not expecting to
make much money here.

Your choice of GPL (not LGPL) probably hinders the broader use of your
technologies. I have created a bunch of open-source projects and
always chose BSD or Apache-style licensing. I humbly recommend that
you reconsider your choice of license.

In any case, since I did not hear back from you in time, I went ahead
and created another open-source project that  provides a Java to
Objective C code-converter. See http://code.google.com/p/java2objc/
for my project. My goal here is somewhat different from yours. I
intend to generate Objective C source-code as if a competent
programmer would have written it. This is at the expense of providing
complete and accurate transformation which (I think) xmlvm strives to
provide.

Thanks
Inder




On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Arno Puder<ar...@pu...> wrote:
>
> Inderjeet,
>
> both GPL and L-GPL require you to submit any
> modifications/enhancements/fixes you make to XMLVM back to us. Both licenses
> allow you to use XMLVM in a commercial product. However, the GPL also
> requires you to make your own application available under the GPL license if
> you link the XMLVM libraries to your application. Most likely this is not
> what you had in mind if you want to use XMLVM for a commercial product (this
> requirement basically limits your business model to services around your
> product).
>
> We put a lot of efforts in making XMLVM. May I suggest an alternative: we
> are willing to grant you a commercial license for XMLVM that would allow you
> to use XMLVM in a commercial product. This commercial license would not
> require you to publish your own source code under an Open Source license. In
> return for the commercial license, you give us some funding to enhance
> XMLVM. This is the essence of dual-licensing (releasing source code under
> two different licenses: an Open Source as well as a commercial license).
> Considering all the work that already went into XMLVM, I think this is a
> fair trade. What do you think?
>
> Arno
>
>
> Inderjeet Singh wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
>> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
>> iPhone ones.
>>
>> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
>> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
>> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
>> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Inderjeet
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>> xml...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Sascha H. <sa...@gm...>]

I just consulted with someone from our team who obviously knows more about
GPL & Co than I do, and it seems like I might be wrong. It might indeed be a
problem for you to use XMLVM you commercial
product as you have to "link" your code against ours.
I would recommend you to take a closer look at what XMLVM can offer you
today and if this is indeed enough for your purposes, please let us know
again and we can talk about future licensing options that might fit your
needs better.

Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks
// Sascha

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Sascha Haeberling <sa...@gm...> wrote:

> Hi Singh!
> Thank you for your interest in XMLVM.
>
> I am not a license expert, but I don't think GPL prevents you from using
> XMLVM in commercial products. We just require you to release all
> modifications again under GPL.
> Take e.g. Linksys routers as an example. These are obviously commercial
> products but some of them use the Linux kernel, which is released under GPL.
> By releasing their modifications under GPL they comply with the license
> terms while still being able to sell the product.
>
> // Sascha
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Inderjeet Singh <ind...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
>> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
>> iPhone ones.
>>
>> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
>> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
>> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
>> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Inderjeet
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>> xml...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>
>
>

Re: [xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Sascha H. <sa...@gm...>]

Hi Singh!
Thank you for your interest in XMLVM.

I am not a license expert, but I don't think GPL prevents you from using
XMLVM in commercial products. We just require you to release all
modifications again under GPL.
Take e.g. Linksys routers as an example. These are obviously commercial
products but some of them use the Linux kernel, which is released under GPL.
By releasing their modifications under GPL they comply with the license
terms while still being able to sell the product.

// Sascha

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Inderjeet Singh <ind...@gm...> wrote:

> Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
> write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
> iPhone ones.
>
> I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
> xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
> it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
> to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?
>
> Thanks
> Inderjeet
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> xmlvm-users mailing list
> xml...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>

[xmlvm-users] Welcome to XMLVM Users!

[Sascha H. <sa...@gm...>]

Hello!
As I see there are already a few subscribers to this mailing list, so I
think it's time to shout out to the world that from now on we are using this
list to get in touch with our community. Therefore this list is also
advertised on our main- and contacts-pages.

I've seen some activity on the SF.net forums, which we completely missed
because we forgot about the existence of this forum. So from now on, this
mailing list is the primary way for our community to get in touch with us
and we will be able to respond quickly.

We're looking forward to you comments, suggestions and questions!

The XMLVM team

[xmlvm-users] Using xmlvm in a commercial product

[Inderjeet S. <ind...@gm...>]

Thank you for writing the xmlvm tool: it seems like an awesome way to
write Java code that is usable in Android applications as well as
iPhone ones.

I noted that you picked GPL as the license. Is your intention that
xmlvm be used only for open-source projects? Would you consider making
it available under LGPL so that we can contribute back modifications
to xmlvm but at least be able to use it in commercial apps?

Thanks
Inderjeet