[Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Matt Gushee]

I am pleased to announce the release of ChartPak 1.0a1.

>From the README:

  The primary goal of this project is to provide an easy-to-use library
  for dynamically generating business-oriented data visualizations for
  the web. It will include a wide variety of common chart types (pie
  charts, bar charts, etc.), and may eventually provide support for more
  specialized types of graphics.

  Ultimately it should be possible for users with only modest technical
  skills to create a set of data displays with ChartPak. It will be some
  time before that goal is reached, though. The initial focus is on
  developing a substantial library of chart types and supporting a
  variety of data sources.

  The current release includes a nice demo application, but is unlikely
  to be of any real use unless you happen to run PostgreSQL and to need
  only simple pie charts.

I would also add that this is my first project in OCaml, so I am sure
there is much room for improvement in my code. Your suggestions are most
welcome.

For more information and downloads, please visit:

  http://www.havenrock.com/software/chartpak/

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee@havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

RE: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Mattias Waldau]

THANK YOU FOR RELEASING CHARTPAK WITH THE BSD LICENSE!

It makes it possible to develop commercial programs with ChartPak and
Ocaml. I hope that more Ocaml-developers realize that GPL and to some
extent LGPL makes it difficult to use their code in commercial
applications where the developers can make a living out of selling the
software.

The fear that the use of a BSD-license will make developers keep their
changes is wrong, since no commersial developer wants to maintain more
software than necessary.

(Please do not start a GPL/LGPL-discussion. For those who believe that
you can be a commercial software developer - not a consultant - around a
GPL-software, just look at Mandrake. Mandrake will probably go bust any
minute now.)

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Alessandro Baretta]

Mattias Waldau wrote:
> THANK YOU FOR RELEASING CHARTPAK WITH THE BSD LICENSE!
> 
> It makes it possible to develop commercial programs with ChartPak and
> Ocaml. I hope that more Ocaml-developers realize that GPL and to some
> extent LGPL makes it difficult to use their code in commercial
> applications where the developers can make a living out of selling the
> software.

This is simply not true. You can very easily sell GPL 
covered software. It is a marketing problem. It no easier to 
sell commercial software than GPL covered software.

> (Please do not start a GPL/LGPL-discussion. For those who believe that
> you can be a commercial software developer - not a consultant - around a
> GPL-software, just look at Mandrake. Mandrake will probably go bust any
> minute now.)


Sorry, I don't buy it. I make my living off of GPL licensed 
code.

Alex

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

RE: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Jérôme Marant]

En réponse à Mattias Waldau <mattias.waldau@abc.se>:


> (Please do not start a GPL/LGPL-discussion. For those who believe that
> you can be a commercial software developer - not a consultant - around
> a
> GPL-software, just look at Mandrake. Mandrake will probably go bust
> any
> minute now.)

Poor misguided one! Poor FUD spreader!

--
Jérôme Marant <jerome@marant.org>
              <jerome.marant@free.fr>

http://marant.org
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

RE: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Fabrice Le Fessant]

>  THANK YOU FOR RELEASING CHARTPAK WITH THE BSD LICENSE!
>  
>  It makes it possible to develop commercial programs with ChartPak and
>  Ocaml. I hope that more Ocaml-developers realize that GPL and to some
>  extent LGPL makes it difficult to use their code in commercial
>  applications where the developers can make a living out of selling the
>  software.

It's always strange to hear someone asking other people to release
their sources completely free, and in the same sentence, explaining
that this should be done so that other developers don't have to
release their own sources...

>  (Please do not start a GPL/LGPL-discussion. 

No, I don't start it, it was already started by your mail ...

- Fabrice
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

License wars (was Re: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web)

[Matt Gushee]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 02:55:25PM +0100, Fabrice Le Fessant wrote:
> 
> >  THANK YOU FOR RELEASING CHARTPAK WITH THE BSD LICENSE!
> >  
> >  It makes it possible to develop commercial programs with ChartPak and
> >  Ocaml.

Ahem. The correct term for that is "proprietary." What are Red Hat and
SuSE Linux if not commercial?

That was part of my reason for choosing BSD, but not all (see below).

> >  I hope that more Ocaml-developers realize that GPL and to some
> >  extent LGPL makes it difficult to use their code in commercial
> >  applications where the developers can make a living out of selling the
> >  software.

Yes, if you have a product-centered business model.

> It's always strange to hear someone asking other people to release
> their sources completely free, and in the same sentence, explaining
> that this should be done so that other developers don't have to
> release their own sources...

:-)

But quite apart from wanting to keep open (for myself) the option of
using my code in a proprietary app, there is another very important
reason I like the BSD license:

I believe very strongly in informed consent in all areas of life. That
means, for example, that when someone accepts a software license, they
should know what they just agreed to. And unfortunately, most software
licenses never get read; they're just too damn long and complex. If
you're an open source developer, you have probably read the GPL, but I'd
wager most end users haven't. And you have undoubtedly also used
Microsoft products. Have you ever read their EULA in its entirety? I bet
you haven't.

The BSD license is one of a handful of open source licenses that is
clear and concise enough that ordinary people (who are neither lawyers
nor geeks) *might* read and understand it. I'm not saying they will, but
I think there is a reasonable chance that, when they see that the entire
license is displayed in one screen of their browser, they will actually
read it.

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee@havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee@havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: License wars (was Re: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web)

[Brian Hurt]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Matt Gushee wrote:

> But quite apart from wanting to keep open (for myself) the option of
> using my code in a proprietary app, 

IANAL, but I do hang out with an IP lawyer, and as I understand it if it's
100% your code you can do whatever the heck with it you like.  You own the
copyright.  Everyone else is bound to the GPL (unless you decide to
release it under another license), but *you* are not.

Mind you, this only applies if it's 100% your code.  If you accept a patch 
from me, for example, then I own part of the copyright as well, and you 
have to get my agreement to change the license on my code/patch.  For 
large projects with lots of involved people (like Linux) it becomes 
effectively impossible to change the license.

I generally perfer the GPL, *because* I'm a professional programmer.  As 
the saying goes, I have to put food on the table as well.  If you want to 
use my code, pay me for it- either money (code for hire), or payment in 
kind.  Which is basically what the GPL is.  The payment to use (modify) my 
code is that I get some of your code.  Don't like the deal?  Don't use the 
code.  Write your own code.

But I'm not religous about it.  I strongly beleive that the guy writting
the code- the guy putting the sweat equity in to create the value- gets to
decide what sort of license it goes under.  Note that by choosing to
extend, and thereby reuse most of, GPL licensed code you are choosing you
license.  This can be viewed both as an advantage (everyone else has to
play under the same rules you play under) and as a disadvantage (you have
to play under the same rules everyone else plays under).  Note the same
can be said about the BSD license- it's both an advantage and a
disadvantage.  It is, however, your choice.

And compared to some of the EULAs that various commercial companies are 
foisting off, there's almost no difference.

Brian

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

[Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Michaël Grünewald]

Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com> writes:

> But quite apart from wanting to keep open (for myself) the option of
> using my code in a proprietary app, there is another very important
> reason I like the BSD license:
> 
> I believe very strongly in informed consent in all areas of life. That
> means, for example, that when someone accepts a software license, they
> should know what they just agreed to. And unfortunately, most software
> licenses never get read; they're just too damn long and complex. If
> you're an open source developer, you have probably read the GPL, but I'd
> wager most end users haven't. And you have undoubtedly also used
> Microsoft products. Have you ever read their EULA in its entirety? I bet
> you haven't.

Oh, these poor little users that want to use software without any
effort, that's so lovely ...

Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.
-- 
Michaël Grünewald <michael-grunewald@wanadoo.fr>
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Alessandro Baretta]

Michaël Grünewald wrote:
> Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com> writes:

>>I believe very strongly in informed consent in all areas of life. That
>>means, for example, that when someone accepts a software license, they
>>should know what they just agreed to. And unfortunately, most software
>>licenses never get read; they're just too damn long and complex. If
>>you're an open source developer, you have probably read the GPL, but I'd
>>wager most end users haven't. And you have undoubtedly also used
>>Microsoft products. Have you ever read their EULA in its entirety? I bet
>>you haven't.
> 
> 
> Oh, these poor little users that want to use software without any
> effort, that's so lovely ...
> 
> Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
> bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
> to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
> majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.

Besides, whether one reads it or not, one is bound by it. If 
one uses software licenced under conditions one *would not* 
agree upon, had one read the licence, it is his or her 
problem, not the developer's.

Alex

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[John Max Skaller]

Alessandro Baretta wrote:


>> Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
>> bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
>> to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
>> majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.
> 
> 
> Besides, whether one reads it or not, one is bound by it.


I think you have it completely backwards.

There is no licence 'agreement'. I am not bound by
it, I have agreed to nothing.

It is completely the other way around.

Copyright may be applied to my use of software.

A 'licence' is a unilateral RELEASE from the
restrictions otherwise imposed by
copyright. And it is on my head to ensure that the
release is valid and authoritative (provably emnating
from the copyright holder) in case I am sued for
breach of copyright.

--
John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au
snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia.
voice:61-2-9660-0850


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

RE: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Mattias Waldau]

We all want Ocaml to be a success. We want people to develop commercial
applications using Ocaml, because otherwise it will never be a success.

Having a lot of libraries that can be used without restrictions is a
competitive advantage for a programming language. Ocaml has few
libraries compared to alternatives, making it more difficult to develop
applications.

I think that many programmers just select the (L)GPL-license without
thinking about the consequences, but I might be wrong. 

/mattias

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

RE: [Caml-list] ANN: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web

[Brian Hurt]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Mattias Waldau wrote:

> We all want Ocaml to be a success. We want people to develop commercial
> applications using Ocaml, because otherwise it will never be a success.

Agreed.

> 
> Having a lot of libraries that can be used without restrictions is a
> competitive advantage for a programming language. Ocaml has few
> libraries compared to alternatives, making it more difficult to develop
> applications.

I don't think libraries are the biggest problem Ocaml faces for commercial 
acceptance.  Both C and C++ gained widespread acceptance with libraries 
not much better than Ocaml's (and in C's case much worse).

I'm unusual in that programming is my hobby as well as my job.  Most of 
the professional programmers I know of don't program outside of work.  The 
more aggressive ones may occassionally take a class to put some new 
buzzword on the resume- but even then, the reasoning is (next-)job 
related, so the courses they take are for hot buzzword technologies.  But 
the average run of the mill programmer doesn't learn anything unless the 
Boss requires it- and the Boss only requires what he reads about in 
Infoweak or whatever magazine is dictating his management philosophy this 
week.

Look at the last 20 years.  In 1980, assembly language was still the "real 
programmers" language of choice, especially on the PC/DOS.  Assembler got 
phased out in favor of C, which a) had good interfacing with assembler, 
and b) let you still do most of your old assembler tricks.  C is a high 
level, portable assembler.  Then along came Object Oriented- remember back 
when OO was a buzzword?  There were many good OO languages, and even some 
C + OO attempt (objective C), but what was the language that won out?  
C++.  Primarily, IMHO, because C++ contains C as a (more or less) proper 
subset.  Which allows you to go on coding in (old familiar) C while 
telling your boss and marketing "Of course we're object oriented!  We're 
coding in C++!"

Over the next eight years, programmers slowly learned OO, on the job.  
And a lot of really bad pseudo-OO code was written, as inclination and
schedules allowed.  Then, along came Java- which is primarily a cleaned up
C++.  The only new ideas Java introduced to C++ programmers was garbage 
collection and virtual machines.  Neither of which were all that new 
really :-).  I've seen examples of virtual machines from the seventies, 
and garbage collection goes back to the early sixties if not farther.  But 
they were radical to the mainstream- radical and scary, judging from the 
amount of resistance I've seen Java face.

The trend here is that the mainstream only takes baby steps.  They can 
learn new things- using a high level language, or OO, or garbage 
collection- but only if they can do so on the job, still meeting 
(unreasonable) deadlines.  And I don't see how you can switch from Java to 
Ocaml, or any truely functional programming language, in such a way.  The 
only way I can see to make the transition is to just make the transition.  
Accept that you will be at a signifigantly reduced productivity while 
learning the new way of thinking.  I think Ocaml is *worth* making the 
transition, but I don't see people doing it.  Sorry.

> I think that many programmers just select the (L)GPL-license without
> thinking about the consequences, but I might be wrong. 

You can link to the LGPL just fine, which makes it much more usable in a 
commercial environment.  Which is why it was invented- it would be 
impossible to do commercial work on Linux at all without it (libc is 
LGPL'd).  Which is also why Stallman doesn't like it.  I personally think 
the LGPL works great for a library- anyone and everyone can *use* the 
library, but improvements to the library have to be shared.

But if I don't write the code, it's not my choice.

Brian


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

[Caml-list] Baby Steps (was: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web)

[Oleg]

On Monday 20 January 2003 03:37 pm, Brian Hurt wrote:
> The trend here is that the mainstream only takes baby steps.

If someone merely added
- ADTs
- variant types
- GC
- strict[er] typing
- and perhaps polymorphism

to C, I wonder if such a language would take off.

Cheers,
Oleg
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Baby Steps (was: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web)

[Michal Moskal]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 11:19:59PM -0500, Oleg wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2003 03:37 pm, Brian Hurt wrote:
> > The trend here is that the mainstream only takes baby steps.
> 
> If someone merely added
> - ADTs
> - variant types
> - GC
> - strict[er] typing
> - and perhaps polymorphism
> 
> to C, I wonder if such a language would take off.

Take a look at http://www.research.att.com/projects/cyclone/ and
<advertise> http://gont.pld.org.pl/ </advertise>.

But if you want to know my opinion... I designed such a language, wrote
compiler for it in OCaml, rewrote compiler in this language (getting
it to bootstrap was a lot of fun :-), and finally coded something else
(kind of extended lambda calculus interpreter) in OCaml. And the final
impression was: it's far easier in OCaml. The main difference between
OCaml (the part that I was using) and Gont was syntax.  And OCaml syntax
is better, once you get used to FP. For example:

<'b>list map(*('b ('a)) f, <'a>list l)
{
        switch l {
        case Nil: return Nil;
        case Cons(hd, tl): return Cons(f(hd), map(f, tl));
        }
}

Or version using type inference:

def map2(f, l)
{
        switch l {
        case Nil: return Nil;
        case Cons(hd, tl): return Cons(f(hd), map2(f, tl));
        }
}

And now in OCaml

let rec map f = function
  | [] -> []
  | x :: xs -> f x :: map f xs

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Baby Steps (was: ChartPak - a data visualization library for the web)

[Michal Moskal]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 01:35:55PM -0600, Brian Hurt wrote:
> 
> There is no argument (in my mind) that Ocaml is a better language than any 
> Functional-C hybrid.  That's not the question.  The question is wether 
> such a language stands a chance of getting programmers to start moving 
> towards a functional language.  

Well, my point when writing Gont was to create new super-hiper language
that is better then anything else.  Now I know I have failed.  Maybe
because making such hybrids isn't best idea, maybe because I don't have
enough experience/knowledge/time.

The main problem here is (I guess) the fact that creating real-life language 
takes lots of effort.  And it is not going to be funny to write language
that is only meant as learning tool for few business programmers.

[...]
> At this point, the people still using C are like the people who are still 
> using Cobol and Fortran.  They will be there until the day they die.  Note 
> that this isn't necessarily bad- C is in many ways a category killer 
> language.  For what I think C is good for (OSs, embedded code, and other 
> stuff banging on hardware) I cannot envision a language sufficiently 
> better than C to make it worthwhile to switch off of C for these 
> environments.  In these environments, C's pointer games and explicit 
> allocation is an *advantage*.  Despite the fact that they're disadvantages 
> just about everywhere else.
> 
> This means you're starting point isn't C.  It's C++ or Java.

Cyclone has all that pointer games (although improved and safer) and quite 
explicit storage management (using regions), which IMHO makes it very
(too?) complex.  It's starting point was definitely C.

My starting point was non-OO part of Java (i.e. parts borrowed from C
but without pointers and with GC).  Maybe it's good as a step between C
and ML but nobody is going to use it in real life project.

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Matt Gushee]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 05:57:27PM +0100, Michaël Grünewald wrote:
> 
> > should know what they just agreed to. And unfortunately, most software
> > licenses never get read; they're just too damn long and complex. If
> > you're an open source developer, you have probably read the GPL, but I'd
> > wager most end users haven't. And you have undoubtedly also used
> > Microsoft products. Have you ever read their EULA in its entirety? I bet
> > you haven't.
> 
> Oh, these poor little users that want to use software without any
> effort, that's so lovely ...
> 
> Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
> bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
> to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
> majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.

In principle I agree that users should not expect to be able to use
software without effort. I certainly have invested considerable effort
to develop my own skills, both as a user and a developer, and I am proud
that I have done so (and continue to do so). But I also believe that
computers and software developers should serve society, not vice versa.

You are entitled to take whatever attitude you choose toward users; I
choose a different attitude from yours. One reason is that I am
interested in using my software to attract consulting business, and
perhaps at some point to develop a commercial product. So for me, users
are potentially customers, and if I made statements like yours I would
not have any customers (actually I have none right now anyway, but I'm
working on that ;-).

You should also note that I am an American living in the U.S., and you
have to be a little bit stupid to get along in this society. That is one
of many things I don't like about American culture, but there's not very
much that one person can do about it. I agree with you also that one
should fight for principles and right-thinking, but you have to be
moderate if you want people to listen ... at least I, in my country,
have to; maybe your situation is different.

In any case, if I were uninterested in challenging the status quo, I
wouldn't be using OCaml, would I?

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee@havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Sven Luther]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 10:33:37PM -0700, Matt Gushee wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 05:57:27PM +0100, Michaël Grünewald wrote:
> > 
> > > should know what they just agreed to. And unfortunately, most software
> > > licenses never get read; they're just too damn long and complex. If
> > > you're an open source developer, you have probably read the GPL, but I'd
> > > wager most end users haven't. And you have undoubtedly also used
> > > Microsoft products. Have you ever read their EULA in its entirety? I bet
> > > you haven't.
> > 
> > Oh, these poor little users that want to use software without any
> > effort, that's so lovely ...
> > 
> > Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
> > bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
> > to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
> > majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.
> 
> In principle I agree that users should not expect to be able to use
> software without effort. I certainly have invested considerable effort
> to develop my own skills, both as a user and a developer, and I am proud
> that I have done so (and continue to do so). But I also believe that
> computers and software developers should serve society, not vice versa.
> 
> You are entitled to take whatever attitude you choose toward users; I
> choose a different attitude from yours. One reason is that I am
> interested in using my software to attract consulting business, and
> perhaps at some point to develop a commercial product. So for me, users
> are potentially customers, and if I made statements like yours I would
> not have any customers (actually I have none right now anyway, but I'm
> working on that ;-).

BTW, a dual licence GPL+proprietary, is even better then for you than
the BSd, since you can release the software under GPL for everyone, and
then have another proprietary release for folk not wanting the GPL. With
a BSD licence, this is not the case, because anyone can take the code
and make anything they want with it.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Dmitry Bely]

Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> writes:

> BTW, a dual licence GPL+proprietary, is even better then for you than
> the BSd, since you can release the software under GPL for everyone, and
> then have another proprietary release for folk not wanting the GPL.

It's only possible if you don't accept any patches from other people. The
patch's copyright is holded by its creator, so you cannot distribute entire
product under different license without the written permission from anyone
who contributed some code to your project.

> With
> a BSD licence, this is not the case, because anyone can take the code
> and make anything they want with it.

- Dmitry Bely


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Sven Luther]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 02:16:37PM +0300, Dmitry Bely wrote:
> Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> writes:
> 
> > BTW, a dual licence GPL+proprietary, is even better then for you than
> > the BSd, since you can release the software under GPL for everyone, and
> > then have another proprietary release for folk not wanting the GPL.
> 
> It's only possible if you don't accept any patches from other people. The
> patch's copyright is holded by its creator, so you cannot distribute entire
> product under different license without the written permission from anyone
> who contributed some code to your project.

You just need to ask them if it is ok to include the patch in your
proprietary tree also, this mean you have to maintain two trees though.
Also some people may not want to release their patches to you, and it is
their right to do so. Nothing is forcing you to accept their patch in
your tree.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Alessandro Baretta]

Dmitry Bely wrote:

> 
> It's only possible if you don't accept any patches from other people. The
> patch's copyright is holded by its creator, so you cannot distribute entire
> product under different license without the written permission from anyone
> who contributed some code to your project.

There actually exist free software projects--major 
ones--where contributors are asked (or forced) to donate 
their copyright to the managing foundation or company. In 
this context, the developer can do whatever he wants with 
his code and that of the contributors alike.

Alex

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[John Max Skaller]

Alessandro Baretta wrote:

> 
>
> There actually exist free software projects--major ones--where 
> contributors are asked (or forced) to donate their copyright to the 
> managing foundation or company. In this context, the developer can do 
> whatever he wants with his code and that of the contributors alike.


For example, the C++ Boost library specifically requires
all contributions to be unencumbered.
-- 
John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au
snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia.
voice:61-2-9660-0850


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Re: [Caml-list] Re: License wars

[John Max Skaller]

> BTW, a dual licence GPL+proprietary, is even better then for you than
> the BSd, since you can release the software under GPL for everyone, and
> then have another proprietary release for folk not wanting the GPL. With
> a BSD licence, this is not the case, because anyone can take the code
> and make anything they want with it.


I look at this differently. A person wishing to make money
by supplying expertise will probably do best providing
the software without encumberence.

Example: Python.



-- 
John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au
snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia.
voice:61-2-9660-0850


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

[Caml-list] Re: License wars

[Michaël Grünewald]

Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com> writes:

[...]

> > Oh, these poor little users that want to use software without any
> > effort, that's so lovely ...
> > 
> > Any computer user must have read and understood the licence (or, less
> > bad than nothing, a digest) of the software it uses. This is pointless
> > to care of the ones that do not. Even if they come from the whole
> > majority, faults must not be agreed but fighted against.
> 
> In principle I agree that users should not expect to be able to use
> software without effort. I certainly have invested considerable effort
> to develop my own skills, both as a user and a developer, and I am proud
> that I have done so (and continue to do so). But I also believe that
> computers and software developers should serve society, not vice versa.

I perfectly agree, and i take bringing the words:

    " You have to be responsible, mature, to stand on your own, no one
      will do your job for you, etc. etc. "

and preventing people from a 'puerilistic' (what a beautiful word :)
laziness, as an *important* service to the society.

> You are entitled to take whatever attitude you choose toward users; I
> choose a different attitude from yours. 

I am currently the *only* user for my software :) that is mainly
oriented to help in my computer ady to day use, and sometimes drawing
pretty pictures.

> One reason is that I am interested in using my software to attract
> consulting business, and perhaps at some point to develop a commercial
> product. So for me, users are potentially customers, and if I made
> statements like yours I would not have any customers (actually I have
> none right now anyway, but I'm working on that ;-).

I think it is a lie to pretend one can be able to use a computer without
knowing anything about them. A friend of mine was bond to this believe,
he bought a computer and one week later was turned crazy by the
easy-to-use-and-user-friendly-interface-it-has. The only help i accepted
to give him was a hundred questions list, with a little introduction on
how to use search-engines and usenet, to give him tools for the answer
quest. It did not work since he is a little bit too lazy, but what else
can i do ? will not bring the food to his mouth, would i do ?

[Not pretending you are a lier, i feel you are someone sympathetic.
 Sincerely] 

> You should also note that I am an American living in the U.S., and you
> have to be a little bit stupid to get along in this society. That is one
> of many things I don't like about American culture, but there's not very
> much that one person can do about it.

You can turn (some parts of your softwares :) into Socrates, or meet a
country ground where people are in better spiritual
dispositions. Nothing get me more sad than seeing almost all peoples are
like old children, that have lost childs qualities [aspire to justice,
aspire to communion, aspire to knowledge] and only the flaws remains
[fear, laziness, seek for forgiviveness].

> I agree with you also that one should fight for principles and
> right-thinking, but you have to be moderate if you want people to
> listen ... at least I, in my country, have to; maybe your situation is
> different.
> 
> In any case, if I were uninterested in challenging the status quo, I
> wouldn't be using OCaml, would I?

Objective Caml, the computer language that discriminates philosophs :)
-- 
Michaël Grünewald <michael-grunewald@wanadoo.fr>
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners