- Esug-list - lists.esug.org

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Georg Heeg

Bruce, You write: “everyone is happy with MIT so I would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation of Sport”. This is the ESUG mailing list where Smalltalk Users of all dialects are participating. Thus I ask why is there the sub-phrase “just that for the Pharo implementation”? What is with all the other implementations? E.g. VisualWorks where the copyright says: “©Bruce Badger 2004, 2005, 2006. Licensed under the LGPL.” Georg Georg Heeg eK, Dortmund und Köthen, HR Dortmund A 12812 Wallstraße 22, 06366 Köthen Tel. +49-3496-214328, Fax +49-3496-214712 Von: Esug-list [mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org] Im Auftrag von Bruce Badger Gesendet: Samstag, 20. Juli 2013 10:08 An: Stéphane Ducasse Cc: esug-list(a)lists.esug.org Members Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with MIT so I would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation of Sport rather than using a dual license. Bruce On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: Thanks you all. This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this is a good news. Stef On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse > <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> Hi Sport contributors >> >> Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a >> Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because it >> uses Sport and Sport is licensed under >> LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce if >> Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his >> answer: >> >> Steph, >> >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects was >> written by different people. >> >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. >> >> So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we can >> get a dual license LGPL/MIT. > > Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing. > > Cheers > Philippe > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org _______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org -- Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills http://www.openskills.org/

July 20, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] Camp Smalltalk ESUG 2013

by Damien Cassou

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > When and where is it? The conference site says the page is forbidden and I > can't seem to log in... the page is not created yet. Camp Smalltalk is on 8 of September. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

July 20, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Bruce Badger

Yes indeed. Looking at the thread I think everyone is happy with MIT so I would suggest going with just that for the Pharo implementation of Sport rather than using a dual license. Bruce On 20 July 2013 08:13, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Thanks you all. > This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this is a > good news. > > Stef > > On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall < > philippe.marschall(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse > > <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > >> Hi Sport contributors > >> > >> Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a > >> Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is > because it > >> uses Sport and Sport is licensed under > >> LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked > Bruce if > >> Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his > >> answer: > >> > >> Steph, > >> > >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in > >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects > was > >> written by different people. > >> > >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. > >> > >> So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we > can > >> get a dual license LGPL/MIT. > > > > Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing. > > > > Cheers > > Philippe > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Esug-list mailing list > > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > -- Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills http://www.openskills.org/

July 20, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Stéphane Ducasse

Thanks you all. This is excellent so I think that Sport can be relicensed and this is a good news. Stef On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse > <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> Hi Sport contributors >> >> Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a >> Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because it >> uses Sport and Sport is licensed under >> LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce if >> Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his >> answer: >> >> Steph, >> >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects was >> written by different people. >> >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. >> >> So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we can >> get a dual license LGPL/MIT. > > Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing. > > Cheers > Philippe > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

July 20, 2013

Camp Smalltalk ESUG 2013

by Sean P. DeNigris

When and where is it? The conference site says the page is forbidden and I can't seem to log in... Thanks! ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Camp-Smalltalk-ESUG-2013-tp4699588.html Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

July 19, 2013

ANN: Mercurial integration for Smalltalk/X IDE

by Jan Vrany

Hello, after 9 month of development and almost that many of use, I'm pleased to announce a first version of stx:libscm, a Mercurial integration into Smalltalk/X IDE. Available at: https://bitbucket.org/janvrany/stx-libscm Summary: - class browser integration: classes and packages can be committed right from the browser via menu. - file browser integration: provides convenient menus for performing common repository tasks like commit, update, push, pull, merge. - uses specialized smalltalk merge tool to merge .st source files which uses semantic diff/merge instead of text diff/merge. - provides "Smalltalkish", object-oriented API to Mercurial repositories using hg command line or command server internally. Best, Jan

July 19, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Philippe Marschall

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Hi Sport contributors > > Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a > Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because it > uses Sport and Sport is licensed under > LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce if > Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his > answer: > > Steph, > > We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in > principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects was > written by different people. > > Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. > > So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we can > get a dual license LGPL/MIT. Should I ever have contributed I agree to dual- or relicensing. Cheers Philippe

July 18, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Paolo Bonzini

Il 18/07/2013 12:19, Stéphane Ducasse ha scritto: > Hi Sport contributors > > Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a > Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because > it uses Sport and Sport is licensed under > LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce > if Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his > answer: > >> Steph, >> >> We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in >> principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects >> was written by different people. >> >> Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. >> > So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we > can get a dual license LGPL/MIT. I agree to MIT relicensing of all LGPL Smalltalk code I've ever written (_not_ GPL, that's another story). Paolo > And yes I'm nervous about mixing licenses in an image-based system that > a infinite minority > of programmers understand or even know. > > Stef > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >

July 18, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Damien Cassou

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > And yes I'm nervous about mixing licenses in an image-based system that a > infinite minority > of programmers understand or even know. I think that, in theory, mixing LGPL (which is much less strict than GPL) and MIT is authorized. Still, it is simpler if everything is of the same license, I agree. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

July 18, 2013

Re: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses

by Dale K. Henrichs

I have ported SPORT to GemStone and I am in favor of an MIT license... Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> To: "esug-list(a)lists.esug.org Members" <esug-list(a)lists.esug.org> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 3:19:36 AM Subject: [Esug-list] About Sport licenses Hi Sport contributors Today while browsing the seaside repository I saw that there is a Seaside30LGPL and I was puzzled. I looked and I saw that this is because it uses Sport and Sport is licensed under LGPL (probably the only packages in mainstream Smalltalk). I asked Bruce if Sport could be relicensed or have a dual license MIT/LGPL here is his answer: <blockquote> Steph, We've had this discussion before, and as before I'm fine with this in principle but it's not me alone to say. Sport for different dialects was written by different people. Sent from my phone. Please forgive brevity. So if you participated to Sport can you reply to this mail so that we can get a dual license LGPL/MIT. And yes I'm nervous about mixing licenses in an image-based system that a infinite minority of programmers understand or even know. Stef _______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org </blockquote>

July 18, 2013