Re: [ql-users] Software pirates in our midst?

[Dave P]

On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> > This also requires them to contribute their
> > changes to other branches of SMSQ too, and to divulge their
> > intellectual property.
> NO. Read the licence again.
> quote:
> When such a proposal is made, the person proposing it may state
> whether its change/addition/modification is to be :
>
> -     distributed in the official versions of the source and binary
> codes, or
> -     distributed in the official versions of the binary codes only, or
> -     not distributed in the official versions, but alongside them.
>
> If it is in the binary only, nobody (apart from me) gets to see it.

Ummm, that's exactly what I said. Not only source has intellectual
property rights. The compiled code does too. If they're forced to include
the results of their labors (if any) into every other version, regardless
then two things happen:

1. Lowest Common Denominator - SMSQ has to work in the same way on the
least capable hardware as the most capable. Consistency and all that.
2. They have to give features to versions that may not be appropriate to
run it.

This hinders development of SMSQ/E.

Dave