On the other hand if you get a compiled version for linux maybe you'll find more testers for your project
EDIT: well, for what Miguel says reltaed to GPL code it doesn't seem to be that nice, but in any case good luck with your project! Besides, I guess the more open you make your project the more you can get feedback from the community.
As I said, we should welcome Ben in his endeavor, but there is no other option than removing the link. It is a direct violation of the license. When he is ready with the source code, we should be happy to allow the distribution of his modifications.
Miguel
I understand well but without some testers I can't be sure the slightly modified source don't weaken the original project ...
I just need some testers for 2 or 3 days (just to finish cleaning the files).
It's why I'll give the source in 2 or 3 days ...
Is this a so big problem 2 or 3 days at max ???
As Miguel said, "yes it is." The GPL is not open for debate/discussion, it is quite clear. If you distribute a binary, you have to provide the source. At the same time. not a day, or a week, or a year later.
Hi Bob,
As far as I know (and that is not much ) GPL says that source can be provided IF someone asks for it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong
Regards
Ethan
On the other hand if you get a compiled version for linux maybe you'll find more testers for your project
EDIT: well, for what Miguel says reltaed to GPL code it doesn't seem to be that nice, but in any case good luck with your project! Besides, I guess the more open you make your project the more you can get feedback from the community.
As I said, we should welcome Ben in his endeavor, but there is no other option than removing the link. It is a direct violation of the license. When he is ready with the source code, we should be happy to allow the distribution of his modifications.
Miguel
I understand well but without some testers I can't be sure the slightly modified source don't weaken the original project ...
I just need some testers for 2 or 3 days (just to finish cleaning the files).
It's why I'll give the source in 2 or 3 days ...
Is this a so big problem 2 or 3 days at max ???
As Miguel said, "yes it is." The GPL is not open for debate/discussion, it is quite clear. If you distribute a binary, you have to provide the source. At the same time. not a day, or a week, or a year later.
Hi Bob,
As far as I know (and that is not much ) GPL says that source can be provided IF someone asks for it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong
Regards
Ethan
I asked if it was available, and it was not. The author agreed to a different solution, and everybody is happy
It is not Bob's call to make any decisions about Toga. He should mind his business with Crafty, and not stuck his nose in other people's engines.
If people have objections, they should contact Toga's author Thomsas Gaksch, in case permission is needed to release a new engine based on Toga.
Damir wrote:It is not Bob's call to make any decisions about Toga. He should mind his business with Crafty, and not stuck his nose in other people's engines.
If people have objections, they should contact Toga's author Thomsas Gaksch, in case permission is needed to release a new engine based on Toga.
The issue has been resolved, so we can move on. I would not like to see this thread, which was initiated by Ben, to derail into a discussion that is not what he wished (about his project). This is not directed to anybody in particular, but for the health of the thread, let's honor Ben and talk about Toga2012.
Jimmy Huggins wrote:Interesting these mods are must more tight about the rules compared to the last group and that is saying something I think.
I am just politely asking to be careful not to hijack the thread of a new guy being driven by our passions. That is not too much to ask. We are still organizing ourselves with some guidelines. So, this is just me asking a favor to the participants.
On the other hand if you get a compiled version for linux maybe you'll find more testers for your project
EDIT: well, for what Miguel says reltaed to GPL code it doesn't seem to be that nice, but in any case good luck with your project! Besides, I guess the more open you make your project the more you can get feedback from the community.
As I said, we should welcome Ben in his endeavor, but there is no other option than removing the link. It is a direct violation of the license. When he is ready with the source code, we should be happy to allow the distribution of his modifications.
Miguel
I understand well but without some testers I can't be sure the slightly modified source don't weaken the original project ...
I just need some testers for 2 or 3 days (just to finish cleaning the files).
It's why I'll give the source in 2 or 3 days ...
Is this a so big problem 2 or 3 days at max ???
As Miguel said, "yes it is." The GPL is not open for debate/discussion, it is quite clear. If you distribute a binary, you have to provide the source. At the same time. not a day, or a week, or a year later.
Hi Bob,
As far as I know (and that is not much ) GPL says that source can be provided IF someone asks for it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong
Regards
Ethan
Correct, but the question seems to be moot since someone has already asked.
Damir wrote:It is not Bob's call to make any decisions about Toga. He should mind his business with Crafty, and not stuck his nose in other people's engines.
If people have objections, they should contact Toga's author Thomsas Gaksch, in case permission is needed to release a new engine based on Toga.
You would do well to follow your OWN advice, IMHO. Exactly which program did you write? Why are you not focused on that? The GPL is well-known and well-understood, even if not by you...
Good luck Ben. I suggest you just start creating your own project or use some open source code that is much weaker since there will be lots of room for improvement and learning.
Interesting name: did you know that "Ben Tennyson" is the name of a cartoon character. My son used to enjoy that cartoon about 5 years ago.
) GPL says that source can be provided IF someone asks for it.