Adrian Same for squeakSSL. :)
Stef On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:03 AM, a...@netstyle.ch wrote: > I fully agree with Stef. > > I don't remember why I assumed the license was MIT, maybe because on > Andreas' blog it says: "we now have what I think is a pretty decent HTTP > server and client implementation for Squeak 4.1". Isn't the missing > license an issue for Squeak? Anyway, obviously its a no-go not only for > Pharo but also for companies (like us at Cmsbox, who considered using > WebClient in the future). > > Cheers, > Adrian > > Zitat von Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr>: > >> Hi andreas >> >> 1- We talked a lot about Webclient used in the Pharo mailing-list and we >> were stupid to think that you read it. Luckily you did it at last. >> 2- I'm also surprised that nobody checked the license (me the first). Shit >> happens even with the best attitude. We are paying attention to contributor >> and >> we learned something today. >> 3- Philippe contacted you with fixes several times and got no reply, sven >> too so people thought that you do not want to talk to them. Apparently not >> so this is good. >> 4- We want to have a good web library in Pharo, so this will not webclient. >> I do not believe that this is good to build any >> software on libraries that have an unclear license. At least I would not do >> it just to avoid to get trap in it. >> 5- We will remove (by today) WebClient from Pharo. >> 6- Pharoers will have to decide and probably to build an open one under MIT. >> 6- Some people do not like that they cannot improve the code they see and >> use daily. >> 7- This is your right to criticize the code quality and design of Pharo, >> there is no problem with that. We have another point of view >> after the years we spent. Now they may be some little glitches and if you >> have precise feedback we are open to hear them. >> We are working working working and ... working on it and we are improving >> everyday -- may be too slowly. >> >> Stef >> >> >>> Hi Sven, >>> >>> [cc: pharo list since I think there are some larger issues to discuss] >>> >>> First of all thank you for your continued interest in WebClient. It is nice >>> to see that people like to use it. However, I'm more than a bit surprised >>> about what you are saying below about having WebClient in Pharo 1.2. >>> Honestly, I was dumbfounded when I went to read some of the discussions on >>> the Pharo list. >>> >>> May I ask what the due diligence process is for including packages in >>> Pharo? I would have expected that the process includes 1) checking the >>> project page on SS for the license and 2) sending the author a courtesy >>> note along the lines of "hey we want to include your code, are you okay >>> with that?" (in particular if the author of the package isn't on the Pharo >>> list and consequently has no clue about what you're doing). >>> >>> 1. Regarding WebClient's license, please have a look at any of the >>> following repositories, all of which are under MIT: >>> >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/Balloon3D.html >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/CroquetGL.html >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/ToolBuilder.html >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/TweakCore.html >>> ... etc ... >>> >>> As you can see, when I mean to put code under the MIT license, I try to >>> state that by including a copy of the license on the front page of the >>> repository as well as setting the license field. Contrary to, for example, >>> the following repositories: >>> >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/ar.html >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/SqueakSSL.html >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/WebClient.html >>> >>> which are not (or not yet) under MIT. Obviously, I'm trying to be as clear >>> as possible on these matters, which is why I was pointing out that your >>> repository incorrectly claims that the version of WebClient in it is >>> LGPLv2. I'm surprised (and shocked) that apparently nobody in Pharo even >>> tries to find out what the license status for WebClient is. >>> >>> 2. Regarding my intentions / position you'll have to keep in mind that I >>> don't read the Pharo list. I tried to follow it in the past only to be >>> faced with several vicious attacks against Squeak and myself and as a >>> consequence I stopped reading it. Consequently, this is the first time >>> anyone has ever mentioned the inclusion of WebClient in Pharo to me. >>> In short, my position is that we need more shared libraries, not more >>> forks. You will probably see the irony that I specifically didn't set a >>> license on WebClient to prevent such forks without any prior discussion >>> (under the hopelessly naive assumption that there would be some sort of due >>> diligence process) only to find out that you've forked WebClient already. >>> How very ironic indeed. >> >>> Because of my position above, I think WebClient should be an external >>> package, loaded for example via Metacello configuration. In fact, that's >>> exactly why I provided a Metacello configuration to begin with. Can someone >>> perhaps explain where the urge to include (and consequently fork) WebClient >>> comes from? WebClient is a perfectly good external package and for the time >>> being I prefer it should stay that way. If you want to replace HTTPSocket, >>> then have a look at Squeak 4.2 which contains a very simple HTTPSocket >>> implementation that has hooks so that WebClient will be used if it's loaded. >>> >>> Regarding fixes for Pharo, as far as I know the only changes that I haven't >>> included was a bunch of #asString sprinkled all over the places, and the >>> abominations of replacing #squeakToUtf8 and #utf8ToSqueak with >>> "convert[From|To]WithConverter: UTF8TextConverter new". On both of these >>> issues I feel very strongly; I will not make the code substantially worse >>> only to deal with shortcomings of Pharo. So if you cannot come to a >>> reasonable resolution for these, you'll need the extension methods. Outside >>> of that, I believe that not only have I integrated all the fixes that have >>> been sent to me, I have also added several patches to WebClient-Pharo that >>> provide important fixes for (in Pharo broken) network operations without >>> which WebClient would not work in any released Pharo versions. >>> >>> Summary: >>> * I'm surprised and I'm shocked to see that there is apparently no due >>> diligence regarding new packages in Pharo. I find this in particular >>> shocking giving the wild claims on the Pharo web site that "From the >>> beginning of Pharo we have maintained a strict rule that every contributor >>> has to sign our license agreement." I haven't. (and geez, when did Michael >>> got dropped from the Pharo board?) >>> >>> * I don't want WebClient to be included in Pharo since this means you will >>> be producing a Pharo-only fork of WebClient which is counter-productive >>> from my perspective. I want WebClient to remain a shared loadable package >>> with a canonical source repository available to all forks of Squeak, >>> including Pharo. >>> >>> * I have, and will continue to do so, integrate fixes for Pharo as long as >>> I consider them reasonable. If there is interest, I can also provide an >>> updated Metacello configuration; although that really just boils down to >>> updating it to the latest package versions. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> - Andreas >>> >>> On 8/29/2010 4:43 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >>>> Andreas, >>>> >>>> The lastest fiddling that I did is now in PharoInBox: >>>> >>>> Name: WebClient-Core-SvenVanCaekenberghe.74 >>>> Author: SvenVanCaekenberghe >>>> Time: 27 August 2010, 1:59:46 pm >>>> UUID: d97ff218-9bde-4259-bf8a-f9d0fe116138 >>>> Ancestors: WebClient-Core-StephaneDucasse.73, WebClient-Core-pmm.73 >>>> >>>> merged in pharo-core 1.2 >>>> >>>> We're down to 2 unit test failures/errors againt your latest tests. >>>> >>>> A number of people including myself are interested, enthousiastic and >>>> willing to help bring WebClient to Pharo (1.1 and 1.2), and by using it, >>>> help it improve its core functionality. However, the current process, >>>> whereby you mostly ignore Pharo related fixes, makes that very difficult >>>> (we basically almost have to start over again with each commit you do, >>>> comparing changes becomes harder and harder). You can check the Pharo >>>> mailing lists. >>>> >>>> As I said before, it is your code and your decision what your standpoint >>>> is regarding portability (to Squeak derivatives and even other >>>> Smalltalks). I can understand it if you find it too much work. But I do >>>> think you should make it clear what your standpoint is. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Sven >>>> >>>> On 29 Aug 2010, at 04:30, Andreas Raab wrote: >>>> >>>>> You're probably busy, so just a little "ping" :-) >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> - Andreas >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original Message -------- >>>>> Subject: Re: WebClient-Core port to Pharo 1.1 final >>>>> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 22:40:07 -0700 >>>>> From: Andreas Raab<andreas.r...@gmx.de> >>>>> To: Sven Van Caekenberghe<s...@beta9.be> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Sven, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for the belated reply I think something is wrong with Thunderbird >>>>> 3's spam filter; it appears that messages with attachments get routinely >>>>> marked as spam or something. In any case a message on Squeak-dev just >>>>> got me to look for lost email and yours was among them :-) >>>>> >>>>> Do you know if these changes are still applicable? There have been >>>>> numerous changes in the meantime in WebClient and haven't been paying >>>>> much attention. >>>>> >>>>> Oh, and one more thing. When I went to the project page at >>>>> http://www.squeaksource.com/ADayAtTheBeach.html it claims that "Code >>>>> commited to this repository will be automatically under LGPLv2 license." >>>>> >>>>> Obviously, this is not true for WebClient; could I ask you to change the >>>>> declaration on your repository or move your versions to some other >>>>> repository? The way it is right now people might rightfully assume that >>>>> the WebClient versions in your repository are under LGPLv2 which is >>>>> simply incorrect. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> - Andreas >>>>> >>>>> On 8/12/2010 1:59 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >>>>>> Hi Andreas, >>>>>> >>>>>> I made some changes to the latest WebClient-Core in order to run it on >>>>>> Pharo 1.1: >>>>>> >>>>>> Sven Van Caekenberghe uploaded a new version of WebClient-Core to >>>>>> project A Day At The Beach: >>>>>> http://www.squeaksource.com/ADayAtTheBeach/WebClient-Core-SvenVanCaekenberghe.63.mcz >>>>>> >>>>>> ==================== Summary ==================== >>>>>> >>>>>> Name: WebClient-Core-SvenVanCaekenberghe.63 >>>>>> Author: SvenVanCaekenberghe >>>>>> Time: 12 August 2010, 10:46:11 am >>>>>> UUID: 149d44b2-138b-4d63-a158-f587b2bd391d >>>>>> Ancestors: WebClient-Core-ar.62 >>>>>> >>>>>> added some more #asString's where needed to deal with the different >>>>>> semantics of #, in Squeak vs Pharo; removed usage of #and:and:and:and: >>>>>> with a composition of #and: in WebClient>>connect >>>>>> >>>>>> ================================================ >>>>>> >>>>>> I still have some tests that fail, but I can't find the problem: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 39 run, 34 passes, 0 expected failures, 0 failures, 5 errors, 0 >>>>>> unexpected passes >>>>>> Failures: >>>>>> >>>>>> Errors: >>>>>> WebClientServerTest>>#testMultipartFiles >>>>>> WebClientServerTest>>#testMultipartFiles2 >>>>>> WebClientServerTest>>#testServerError >>>>>> WebClientServerTest>>#testWebSockets >>>>>> WebClientServerTest>>#testWebSocketsFraming >>>>>> >>>>>> The #testServerError bothers me most. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am posting this to a Pharo list as well so that maybe others can help. >>>>>> Maybe I'll find the problems myself later on. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sven >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
