From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id JAA10730; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:30:17 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA10415 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:30:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (vlan1-1.bigip2.lax.untd.com [64.136.28.160]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i3E7UEYM008031 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:30:14 +0200 Received: from outbound28-2.lax.untd.com (smtp04.lax.untd.com [10.130.24.124]) by smtpout01.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABAH34DRA2TQ4QS for (sender ); Wed, 14 Apr 2004 00:29:51 -0700 (PST) Received: (qmail 28344 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 07:29:13 -0000 Received: from dsc05-sei-wa-207-220-163-70.rasserver.net (HELO vangogh) (207.220.163.70) by smtp04.lax.untd.com with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 07:29:13 -0000 From: "Brandon J. Van Every" To: Subject: [Caml-list] BSD vs. GPL Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 00:38:08 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20040414061600.GA25717@tallman.kefka.frap.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Importance: Normal X-ContentStamp: 16:8:4279193172 X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; brandon:99 gpl:01 knowles:99 brandon:99 fwiw:01 idealism:01 idealism:01 non-free:01 lgpl:01 non-free:01 mankind:99 noone:01 dependencies:01 seattle:99 2004:99 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 311 Kenneth Knowles wrote: > Brandon J. Van Every wrote: > > I am not interested in Free Software as in 'free beer', I > > am interested > > as in 'free speech'. And FWIW I'm on the MIT/BSD side of > > the debate. > > The primary motivation for much free software *is* FSF-style > idealism. True. And I can't stand those people. > It is > not reasonable to expect to reap the benefits of this idealism while > contradicting its values. Nonsense. Read again: "I am on the MIT/BSD side of the debate," as are MANY open source projects. > All I hear is "gimme, gimme" when non-free software > developers ask for MIT/BSD > and LGPL licenses. I am a non-free software developer > myself, so don't think I don't see from that perspective. Idealists think the programmer is supposed to contribute massive amounts of time and money for the betterment of all mankind. (Remember, time == money.) Pragmatists think the individual should contribute very little, and that the value of Open Source should come from the collective accumulation of very small contributions. To a pragmatist, this is economically rational. We think the idealists are extremely silly people with way too much time (and hence money) on their hands. Views change a lot when you're blowing your own money, not someone else's. > > > When you look to other languages: There are often > > > commercial interests > > > behind ports to Windows (e.g. ActiveState). I don't think > > > the O'Caml market is ready for such a thing. > > > > Things don't get ready by waiting around for others to act. > > People who want to get it ready, are what get it ready. > > Well said. It is telling that there is noone who wants to > get it ready, considering Windows' market share. Get what ready, OCaml package managers that work on Windows? I certainly want to get it ready, but it's a question of rational labor contributions. A far better strategy for me, for now, is to put my attention into The Nebula Device. It has a very nice Windows build procedure that has nothing to do with OCaml, and it doesn't employ a bunch of open source dependencies needing package management. Even if it did, it's got plenty of Windows-centric slave labor behind it. Simply put, for 3D game stuff, it is a more effective organizational body than anything the OCaml world has to offer. (BSD project BTW. ;-) Adding OCaml to Nebula is a modest project. My pressing need for OCaml package management only comes *after* undertaking that project. And who knows, maybe I'll mostly be writing original code than bothering with anyone else's crufty code. I don't know where future game projects will lead me. So, if nobody else is interested in OCaml package management on Windows for now, don't be surprised that I don't volunteer to be the first upon the sacrificial altar. I only do things on an as-needed basis. I'd be happy to help if others have similar needs though. Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA Taking risk where others will not. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.643 / Virus Database: 411 - Release Date: 3/25/2004 ------------------- 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