Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Joao Silva]

Hi.

I think is a good idea not to let "die" dos software.

I still have some dos sofware (games and programs) on cds... i think.

If is legal to upload to archive.org i'm up for it.

I'm from Portugal by the way.

Thanks!

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:54 AM Martin Iturbide 
wrote:

> Hi
>
> To preserve all old DOS software (freeware, shareware, demo, for
> non-commercial use, open source, etc) I recommend creating individual
> accounts on archive.org and uploading it there. The Internet Archive is a
> non-profit public library in the US that can store copies of books and
> archives according to the US copyright law (108). I think it is important
> to not let the DOS software disappear from the earth. If someone has DOS
> BBS backups with several files that are no longer available on the web, it
> may be a good option to upload them there.
>
> About the "Freeware for non-commercial use". It goes against the OSI
> definition, even if the author shares the source code, when he puts that on
> the license it breaks the OSI definition "#6. No Discrimination Against
> Fields of Endeavor". Check https://opensource.org/osd
>
> My opinion is that we should not risk the FreeDOS project with software
> that is not formally open source software. We may describe the software,
> create articles about it, share our own screenshots, and link that DOS
> software (if it is legally available on the web), but not host non open
> source files on a FreeDOS project server.
>
> I cross my fingers that the author of Diskman will accept to open source
> it.
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 5:48 PM Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
>> Liam,
>> WordTsar looks indeed „funny“ on my iMac. Thx for pointing it out.
>>
>> Regarding Raskin’s Editor: There are builds for Windows, Mac and Linux:
>>
>>
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20080224100142/http://rchi.raskincenter.org/index.php?title=Download
>>
>> A recent Tribute to his ZOOM World is nice to try out here:
>>
>> http://www.raskinformac.com/#features
>>
>> … so it hasn’t fallen completely into oblivion. One finds the story all
>> over the net when searching
>> for example: Enso, Ubiquity, Archy, THE SWYFT CARD
>>
>> His son apparently tried for a while to push forward on this, but it all
>> stopped at some point.
>> I think this is because it works nice for single users, small data sets
>> with text and so on, but not in larger contexts, especially multiplex and
>> graphics content.
>>
>> - Thomas
>>
>>
>> > Am 07.05.2021 um 23:11 schrieb Liam Proven :
>> >
>> > On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 18:29, Thomas Desi  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Maybe those legacy editors are still around in discussion because of
>> their „paradigmas“ they created
>> >> around editing text on a computer.
>> >
>> > Well, yes.
>> >
>> >> Editor „Brief“ refers maybe besides other features to „incremental“
>> Home / End Keys (e.g. first HOME press moves caret to Start-Of-Line, a
>> second press moves the caret a line up, till Start-of-File) or more in
>> general to key commands which became models for period of time for many
>> editors.
>> >
>> > Aha! Interesting. I have not heard of that before.
>> >
>> >> Hard to say one is better then the other. We only became „locked into“
>> a system in the last 50 years.
>> >
>> > Very true.
>> >
>> > But there is real value in having a near-universal system. IBM CUA
>> > came in at the end of the DOS era, but has persisted in some forms...
>> > Windows, all the mainstream xNix desktops, OS/2, and even Mac OS X hew
>> > to it to some degree. OS X more than Classic MacOS.
>> >
>> > It's partly why I do not use Vim or Emacs. I learned editors in the
>> > early 1980s, when every one was totally different and many computers
>> > had multiple different editors. I was au fait with dozens and switched
>> > easily.
>> >
>> > CUA came as a huge relief; after it, one model and one UI worked
>> everywhere.
>> >
>> > I don't care _how_ much editing power Vim or Emacs may have; they do
>> > not conform to the dominant UI of the last 35+ years, and as such, I
>> > am not interested in learning yet another UI. I will use the one that
>> > works in Notepad, Gedit, Leafpad, Mousepad, Kate, Geany, Text Edit,
>> > EDIT.EXE, EDITOR.EXE, etc. etc.
>> >
>> >> So each and every text editor (especially those) provokes a
>> quasi-religious attitude of the user
>> >> towards the computer and its behaviour.
>> >
>> > Exactly so, yes.
>> >
>> >> Adding pull-down menues or calling the menue by pressing F10 or F1 for
>> Help… Most of these conventions are gone because of the ubiquity of the
>> mouse or touchpad.
>> >
>> > True.
>> >
>> >> Printing, which has been such a killer issue, has become IMHO much
>> less important lately, as most text feed into the web (blogs) or Emails.
>> PDF as the main currency. Word’s doc format unfortunately is asked nearly
>> in every domain as the common denominator. Be green - use your screen!
>> >
>> > True.
>> >
>> >> Designing a *complete* system for editing text must include the actual
>> 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Martin Iturbide]

Hi

To preserve all old DOS software (freeware, shareware, demo, for
non-commercial use, open source, etc) I recommend creating individual
accounts on archive.org and uploading it there. The Internet Archive is a
non-profit public library in the US that can store copies of books and
archives according to the US copyright law (108). I think it is important
to not let the DOS software disappear from the earth. If someone has DOS
BBS backups with several files that are no longer available on the web, it
may be a good option to upload them there.

About the "Freeware for non-commercial use". It goes against the OSI
definition, even if the author shares the source code, when he puts that on
the license it breaks the OSI definition "#6. No Discrimination Against
Fields of Endeavor". Check https://opensource.org/osd

My opinion is that we should not risk the FreeDOS project with software
that is not formally open source software. We may describe the software,
create articles about it, share our own screenshots, and link that DOS
software (if it is legally available on the web), but not host non open
source files on a FreeDOS project server.

I cross my fingers that the author of Diskman will accept to open source
it.

Regards

On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 5:48 PM Thomas Desi  wrote:

> Liam,
> WordTsar looks indeed „funny“ on my iMac. Thx for pointing it out.
>
> Regarding Raskin’s Editor: There are builds for Windows, Mac and Linux:
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20080224100142/http://rchi.raskincenter.org/index.php?title=Download
>
> A recent Tribute to his ZOOM World is nice to try out here:
>
> http://www.raskinformac.com/#features
>
> … so it hasn’t fallen completely into oblivion. One finds the story all
> over the net when searching
> for example: Enso, Ubiquity, Archy, THE SWYFT CARD
>
> His son apparently tried for a while to push forward on this, but it all
> stopped at some point.
> I think this is because it works nice for single users, small data sets
> with text and so on, but not in larger contexts, especially multiplex and
> graphics content.
>
> - Thomas
>
>
> > Am 07.05.2021 um 23:11 schrieb Liam Proven :
> >
> > On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 18:29, Thomas Desi  wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe those legacy editors are still around in discussion because of
> their „paradigmas“ they created
> >> around editing text on a computer.
> >
> > Well, yes.
> >
> >> Editor „Brief“ refers maybe besides other features to „incremental“
> Home / End Keys (e.g. first HOME press moves caret to Start-Of-Line, a
> second press moves the caret a line up, till Start-of-File) or more in
> general to key commands which became models for period of time for many
> editors.
> >
> > Aha! Interesting. I have not heard of that before.
> >
> >> Hard to say one is better then the other. We only became „locked into“
> a system in the last 50 years.
> >
> > Very true.
> >
> > But there is real value in having a near-universal system. IBM CUA
> > came in at the end of the DOS era, but has persisted in some forms...
> > Windows, all the mainstream xNix desktops, OS/2, and even Mac OS X hew
> > to it to some degree. OS X more than Classic MacOS.
> >
> > It's partly why I do not use Vim or Emacs. I learned editors in the
> > early 1980s, when every one was totally different and many computers
> > had multiple different editors. I was au fait with dozens and switched
> > easily.
> >
> > CUA came as a huge relief; after it, one model and one UI worked
> everywhere.
> >
> > I don't care _how_ much editing power Vim or Emacs may have; they do
> > not conform to the dominant UI of the last 35+ years, and as such, I
> > am not interested in learning yet another UI. I will use the one that
> > works in Notepad, Gedit, Leafpad, Mousepad, Kate, Geany, Text Edit,
> > EDIT.EXE, EDITOR.EXE, etc. etc.
> >
> >> So each and every text editor (especially those) provokes a
> quasi-religious attitude of the user
> >> towards the computer and its behaviour.
> >
> > Exactly so, yes.
> >
> >> Adding pull-down menues or calling the menue by pressing F10 or F1 for
> Help… Most of these conventions are gone because of the ubiquity of the
> mouse or touchpad.
> >
> > True.
> >
> >> Printing, which has been such a killer issue, has become IMHO much less
> important lately, as most text feed into the web (blogs) or Emails. PDF as
> the main currency. Word’s doc format unfortunately is asked nearly in every
> domain as the common denominator. Be green - use your screen!
> >
> > True.
> >
> >> Designing a *complete* system for editing text must include the actual
> keyboard layout, dedicated keys, the pointing device, the editor software
> (yeah), and the… operating system. All need to finally feed into the
> „ergonomic“ aspect  (key-chording in legacy Emacs can in bad cases lead to
> injury of the hands), free the unnecessary mental load (editing prose in
> vi/vim having in mind which mode one is in, is mindf**k). The two paradigma
> Emacs/Vi(m) are rather similar in contrast 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Thomas Desi]

Liam, 
WordTsar looks indeed „funny“ on my iMac. Thx for pointing it out.

Regarding Raskin’s Editor: There are builds for Windows, Mac and Linux:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080224100142/http://rchi.raskincenter.org/index.php?title=Download

A recent Tribute to his ZOOM World is nice to try out here:

http://www.raskinformac.com/#features

… so it hasn’t fallen completely into oblivion. One finds the story all over 
the net when searching
for example: Enso, Ubiquity, Archy, THE SWYFT CARD 

His son apparently tried for a while to push forward on this, but it all 
stopped at some point. 
I think this is because it works nice for single users, small data sets with 
text and so on, but not in larger contexts, especially multiplex and graphics 
content.

- Thomas


> Am 07.05.2021 um 23:11 schrieb Liam Proven :
> 
> On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 18:29, Thomas Desi  wrote:
>> 
>> Maybe those legacy editors are still around in discussion because of their 
>> „paradigmas“ they created
>> around editing text on a computer.
> 
> Well, yes.
> 
>> Editor „Brief“ refers maybe besides other features to „incremental“ Home / 
>> End Keys (e.g. first HOME press moves caret to Start-Of-Line, a second press 
>> moves the caret a line up, till Start-of-File) or more in general to key 
>> commands which became models for period of time for many editors.
> 
> Aha! Interesting. I have not heard of that before.
> 
>> Hard to say one is better then the other. We only became „locked into“ a 
>> system in the last 50 years.
> 
> Very true.
> 
> But there is real value in having a near-universal system. IBM CUA
> came in at the end of the DOS era, but has persisted in some forms...
> Windows, all the mainstream xNix desktops, OS/2, and even Mac OS X hew
> to it to some degree. OS X more than Classic MacOS.
> 
> It's partly why I do not use Vim or Emacs. I learned editors in the
> early 1980s, when every one was totally different and many computers
> had multiple different editors. I was au fait with dozens and switched
> easily.
> 
> CUA came as a huge relief; after it, one model and one UI worked everywhere.
> 
> I don't care _how_ much editing power Vim or Emacs may have; they do
> not conform to the dominant UI of the last 35+ years, and as such, I
> am not interested in learning yet another UI. I will use the one that
> works in Notepad, Gedit, Leafpad, Mousepad, Kate, Geany, Text Edit,
> EDIT.EXE, EDITOR.EXE, etc. etc.
> 
>> So each and every text editor (especially those) provokes a quasi-religious 
>> attitude of the user
>> towards the computer and its behaviour.
> 
> Exactly so, yes.
> 
>> Adding pull-down menues or calling the menue by pressing F10 or F1 for Help… 
>> Most of these conventions are gone because of the ubiquity of the mouse or 
>> touchpad.
> 
> True.
> 
>> Printing, which has been such a killer issue, has become IMHO much less 
>> important lately, as most text feed into the web (blogs) or Emails. PDF as 
>> the main currency. Word’s doc format unfortunately is asked nearly in every 
>> domain as the common denominator. Be green - use your screen!
> 
> True.
> 
>> Designing a *complete* system for editing text must include the actual 
>> keyboard layout, dedicated keys, the pointing device, the editor software 
>> (yeah), and the… operating system. All need to finally feed into the 
>> „ergonomic“ aspect  (key-chording in legacy Emacs can in bad cases lead to 
>> injury of the hands), free the unnecessary mental load (editing prose in 
>> vi/vim having in mind which mode one is in, is mindf**k). The two paradigma 
>> Emacs/Vi(m) are rather similar in contrast to the ACME and SAM editors, 
>> using the three button mouse.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> And just to mention it, there once was Jef Raskin's „Canon Cat“. His 
>> paradigma of „all is text“ (like Rob Pike’s ACME?) but denying the use of 
>> the mouse in favour of a copyrighted „Leap“ key, which basically is Emacs’ 
>> search-command. Gaining seconds but asking the user to retype typos in order 
>> to move the caret to that spot. It is amazing how these geniuses were 
>> somewhat wrong in predicting the future despite the objective superiority of 
>> their concepts. Raskin’s work (Swyft card, THE, ARCHY) dove into oblivion.
> 
> Ha! As I read your message, I thought of the Cat.
> 
> I wish someone would do a clone of its UI using normal PC keyboards
> and (say) Emacs as its base. It was an inspired design.
>> 
>> Rob Pike in 1991 wrote an article ( 
>> http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/help/help.pdf ) which is still worth 
>> reading. Let me quote: "Where will we be ten years from now? CRT’s will be a 
>> thing of the past, multimedia will no longer be a buzzword, pen-based and 
>> voice input will be everywhere, and university students will still be 
>> editing with emacs. Pens and touchscreens are too low-bandwidth for real 
>> interaction; voice will probably also turn out to be inadequate. (Anyway, 
>> who would want to work in an environment surrounded 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Liam Proven]

On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 18:29, Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Maybe those legacy editors are still around in discussion because of their 
> „paradigmas“ they created
> around editing text on a computer.

Well, yes.

> Editor „Brief“ refers maybe besides other features to „incremental“ Home / 
> End Keys (e.g. first HOME press moves caret to Start-Of-Line, a second press 
> moves the caret a line up, till Start-of-File) or more in general to key 
> commands which became models for period of time for many editors.

Aha! Interesting. I have not heard of that before.

>  Hard to say one is better then the other. We only became „locked into“ a 
> system in the last 50 years.

Very true.

But there is real value in having a near-universal system. IBM CUA
came in at the end of the DOS era, but has persisted in some forms...
Windows, all the mainstream xNix desktops, OS/2, and even Mac OS X hew
to it to some degree. OS X more than Classic MacOS.

It's partly why I do not use Vim or Emacs. I learned editors in the
early 1980s, when every one was totally different and many computers
had multiple different editors. I was au fait with dozens and switched
easily.

CUA came as a huge relief; after it, one model and one UI worked everywhere.

I don't care _how_ much editing power Vim or Emacs may have; they do
not conform to the dominant UI of the last 35+ years, and as such, I
am not interested in learning yet another UI. I will use the one that
works in Notepad, Gedit, Leafpad, Mousepad, Kate, Geany, Text Edit,
EDIT.EXE, EDITOR.EXE, etc. etc.

> So each and every text editor (especially those) provokes a quasi-religious 
> attitude of the user
> towards the computer and its behaviour.

Exactly so, yes.

> Adding pull-down menues or calling the menue by pressing F10 or F1 for Help… 
> Most of these conventions are gone because of the ubiquity of the mouse or 
> touchpad.

True.

> Printing, which has been such a killer issue, has become IMHO much less 
> important lately, as most text feed into the web (blogs) or Emails. PDF as 
> the main currency. Word’s doc format unfortunately is asked nearly in every 
> domain as the common denominator. Be green - use your screen!

True.

> Designing a *complete* system for editing text must include the actual 
> keyboard layout, dedicated keys, the pointing device, the editor software 
> (yeah), and the… operating system. All need to finally feed into the 
> „ergonomic“ aspect  (key-chording in legacy Emacs can in bad cases lead to 
> injury of the hands), free the unnecessary mental load (editing prose in 
> vi/vim having in mind which mode one is in, is mindf**k). The two paradigma 
> Emacs/Vi(m) are rather similar in contrast to the ACME and SAM editors, using 
> the three button mouse.

Agreed.

> And just to mention it, there once was Jef Raskin's „Canon Cat“. His 
> paradigma of „all is text“ (like Rob Pike’s ACME?) but denying the use of the 
> mouse in favour of a copyrighted „Leap“ key, which basically is Emacs’ 
> search-command. Gaining seconds but asking the user to retype typos in order 
> to move the caret to that spot. It is amazing how these geniuses were 
> somewhat wrong in predicting the future despite the objective superiority of 
> their concepts. Raskin’s work (Swyft card, THE, ARCHY) dove into oblivion.

Ha! As I read your message, I thought of the Cat.

I wish someone would do a clone of its UI using normal PC keyboards
and (say) Emacs as its base. It was an inspired design.
>
> Rob Pike in 1991 wrote an article ( 
> http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/help/help.pdf ) which is still worth 
> reading. Let me quote: "Where will we be ten years from now? CRT’s will be a 
> thing of the past, multimedia will no longer be a buzzword, pen-based and 
> voice input will be everywhere, and university students will still be editing 
> with emacs. Pens and touchscreens are too low-bandwidth for real interaction; 
> voice will probably also turn out to be inadequate. (Anyway, who would want 
> to work in an environment surrounded by people talking to their computers?) 
> Mice are sure to be with us a while longer, so we should learn how to use 
> them well.“
>
> Did he say „ten years“? 1991 is now thirty years ago…

:-/

> He didn’t speak about tablets/smartphones - but have you tried working with 
> text editing on a touch-screen? Orrrgh.

Oh my yes.

> Today one can easily realize one’s own design of a keyboard, or have extra 
> special macro keyboards, or pointing devices like roller mouse, trackpad, 
> magic mouse etc.
> Still the software lacks enormously, especially for text editing in prose. 
> Sound’s pretensiously silly, I know.
> But, Keyboard Commands seem for many people old fashioned and awkward in Text 
> editing, navigating, working with the system.  It’s all absurdly bloated, 
> even the computer system is enormous.

I agree again. We are going backwards nowadays.

> Looking back at those thoughts, designs and ideas of thirty+ years ago, using 
> DOS, 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Thomas Desi]

Maybe those legacy editors are still around in discussion because of their 
„paradigmas“ they created 
around editing text on a computer. Editor „Brief“ refers maybe besides other 
features to „incremental“ Home / End Keys (e.g. first HOME press moves caret to 
Start-Of-Line, a second press moves the caret a line up, till Start-of-File) or 
more in general to key commands which became models for period of time for many 
editors. Just like  the Wordstar „diamond“ arrow subtitution 
right/left/up/down, which actually is not ideal. Other combintations CTL-q, 
CTL-O, CLT-K like „groups“ of commands can be found in many editors of that 
time. It is strange that so many similar approaches were just recreated and 
„cloned“. (The discussed usefullnes of "h j k l“ navigating keys in vim is well 
known.)

 Interesting to me in all this is the connection (or lack of) between hardware 
- i.e. the keyboard layout - and the software (control keys, greykeys etc.). 
Usability and ergonomy has been sacrified for a much to broad scope of uses and 
- marketing.

The Atari keyboard „middle block“ has its own design: 

HELP  |  Undo

Insert | up |  Clr Home

left   | dwn| right


Maybe this is somewhat a progress to have a dedicated UNDO-key or HELP-key? Or 
was it just to be „different“, like the bumps on old Apple keys on „d“ and „k“ 
instead of „f“ and „j“? Hard to say one is better then the other. We only 
became „locked into“ a system in the last 50 years.

So each and every text editor (especially those) provokes a quasi-religious 
attitude of the user 
towards the computer and its behaviour. Adding pull-down menues or calling the 
menue by pressing F10 or F1 for Help… Most of these conventions are gone 
because of the ubiquity of the mouse or touchpad. 
I find it surprising to use „Mouskeys“ in DOS editors which probably never 
where thought to be used with the mouse. 

Besides inventive features or approaches in design of the software itself me 
personally, I am looking for an optimal workflow combining keyboard/mouse and 
software with what I want do with the editor. (Not programming) 
Coding / „Programming“ is definitely different from prose writing. The first 
uses much more line breaks, Tabs, pairs of parenthesis, for example. Maybe also 
more going back and forth from one spot to another and back again etc. than the 
letter, where you have to be able to quickly correct typos on the fly. 

Printing, which has been such a killer issue, has become IMHO much less 
important lately, as most text feed into the web (blogs) or Emails. PDF as the 
main currency. Word’s doc format unfortunately is asked nearly in every domain 
as the common denominator. Be green - use your screen!

Designing a *complete* system for editing text must include the actual keyboard 
layout, dedicated keys, the pointing device, the editor software (yeah), and 
the… operating system. All need to finally feed into the „ergonomic“ aspect  
(key-chording in legacy Emacs can in bad cases lead to injury of the hands), 
free the unnecessary mental load (editing prose in vi/vim having in mind which 
mode one is in, is mindf**k). The two paradigma Emacs/Vi(m) are rather similar 
in contrast to the ACME and SAM editors, using the three button mouse. 

And just to mention it, there once was Jef Raskin's „Canon Cat“. His paradigma 
of „all is text“ (like Rob Pike’s ACME?) but denying the use of the mouse in 
favour of a copyrighted „Leap“ key, which basically is Emacs’ search-command. 
Gaining seconds but asking the user to retype typos in order to move the caret 
to that spot. It is amazing how these geniuses were somewhat wrong in 
predicting the future despite the objective superiority of their concepts. 
Raskin’s work (Swyft card, THE, ARCHY) dove into oblivion.

Rob Pike in 1991 wrote an article ( 
http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/help/help.pdf ) which is still worth 
reading. Let me quote: "Where will we be ten years from now? CRT’s will be a 
thing of the past, multimedia will no longer be a buzzword, pen-based and voice 
input will be everywhere, and university students will still be editing with 
emacs. Pens and touchscreens are too low-bandwidth for real interaction; voice 
will probably also turn out to be inadequate. (Anyway, who would want to work 
in an environment surrounded by people talking to their computers?) Mice are 
sure to be with us a while longer, so we should learn how to use them well.“

Did he say „ten years“? 1991 is now thirty years ago…

He didn’t speak about tablets/smartphones - but have you tried working with 
text editing on a touch-screen? Orrrgh.

Today one can easily realize one’s own design of a keyboard, or have extra 
special macro keyboards, or pointing devices like roller mouse, trackpad, magic 
mouse etc.
Still the software lacks enormously, especially for text editing in prose. 
Sound’s pretensiously silly, I know. 
But, Keyboard Commands seem for many 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Liam Proven]

On Fri, 7 May 2021 at 03:58, dmccunney  wrote:

> Once upon a time, an outfit called Mark of the Unicorn made an editor
> for CP/M called Mince, which was an acronym for Mince Is Not Complete
> Emacs.  It used the Emacs design and keyboard mappings, but there were
> limits to what you could do in CP/M where you *might* have 48K to hold
> OS, program, and data. It was ported to MS DOS by MOTU.  As far as I
> can tell, it was then acquired by a company called Underware and
> sold/supported by them.
>
> Borland acquired the product from Underware, and released a version as
> The Final World.  Final Word was then released in a new version and
> renamed Sprint.  Sprint was a popular word processor for MS DOS,
> notable for an extensive macro language making it more like "real"
> emacs..  As DOS became moribund and Windows took over.  Borland
> withdrew Sprint from the market.  I have a copy of Sprint sent to me
> in the original distribution archive, but he didn't specify where *he*
> got it. Lacking provenance, I *didn't* make it available for download
> from TextEditors.  I just documented that it used to exist.

Fair.

I tried Sprint back when it was new. It was a remarkable program, with
2 compelling features:
• it could emulate the UIs of most of the leading DOS WPs of the time,
so whatever one you knew, you could use Sprint;
• it saved continuously in the background, so even if the PC crashed,
you shouldn't lose more than a word or 2 of your text.

The snags were:
#1 was rapidly becoming irrelevant as everyone's DOS apps converged on
the IBM CUA standard of look and feel, as even today, most GUIs still
honour, even on Linux...

... and #2 didn't work so reliably with the fairly new tech of DOS
disk caches that could cache writes as well as reads.

Meanwhile, Sprint was relatively poor at formatting and layout, and
printer drivers, which were becoming killer features at the time.

A very good idea that came along a bit too late.

> Borland has been gradually releasing ancient stuff under a Community
> license, and things like Turbo Pascal and Turbo C are available as a
> free download and free to use. If memory serves, source is available
> too, but of questionable use.  Good luck acquiring the proper
> toolchain and being *able* to change and rebuild.it.
>
> I recall Brief being promised, but not available the last time I
> looked.  Should it *become* available. I\ll link to it on TextEditors/

I never used Brief but then I was not and am not really a programmer.

However I note that there is a GPL clone of it:
https://github.com/adamyg/grief

And a commercial one:
https://crisp.com/

Neither supports DOS, but as Grief looks to be a text-mode app, it
might be feasible to port it. Probably a lot of work for someone,
though.

> There *isn't* one.  WordStar was never formally made freeware.  It was
> simply abandoned. Note that the WordStar.org site explicitly *states*
> you will not find binaries there, and why..  It's front and center on
> the site..

Indeed so.

There is the unfinished-but-working WordTsar:
http://wordtsar.ca/

> Bluntly, the implicit assumption I might *not* have is offensive and
> personally *insultiing*.,  If you want to continue this conversation
> with me, you can give me a formal apology and *not* do that again..

To be honest, I have felt the same way about several people's replies
to me here on this list. I was part of this community 12+ years ago,
but I found the tone rather hostile so I left. Now I have returned,
because I am intermittently pursuing a couple of DOS-related projects
of my own, I quickly remembered why I left.

All I can say is: it's not just you. :-( I get a strong feeling of
being treated like an idiot and condescended to.

-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[dmccunney]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:52 PM Jim Hall  wrote:
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:00 PM dmccunney  wrote:



> > You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.

> > I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
> > is what it says in the site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
> > a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
> > hardware it runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
> > pocket calculator.
> >
> > Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
> > shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
> > docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
> > Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
> > one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
> > abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
> > registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
> > fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
> > because long gone authors, I see no point to listing it.
> >
> > A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
> > hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
> > so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
> > history.
>
> Interesting wiki. I looked up BRIEF but didn't find a download link on the 
> wiki:
> http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Brief

No download link because I couldn't find a legit one.

Once upon a time, an outfit called Mark of the Unicorn made an editor
for CP/M called Mince, which was an acronym for Mince Is Not Complete
Emacs.  It used the Emacs design and keyboard mappings, but there were
limits to what you could do in CP/M where you *might* have 48K to hold
OS, program, and data. It was ported to MS DOS by MOTU.  As far as I
can tell, it was then acquired by a company called Underware and
sold/supported by them.

Borland acquired the product from Underware, and released a version as
The Final World.  Final Word was then released in a new version and
renamed Sprint.  Sprint was a popular word processor for MS DOS,
notable for an extensive macro language making it more like "real"
emacs..  As DOS became moribund and Windows took over.  Borland
withdrew Sprint from the market.  I have a copy of Sprint sent to me
in the original distribution archive, but he didn't specify where *he*
got it. Lacking provenance, I *didn't* make it available for download
from TextEditors.  I just documented that it used to exist.

I now discover there *is* a valid link to download something called
Brief.  The publishers apparently rewrote it from scratch as a Windows
application, but it seems to look and feel  and have the same features
as the DOS version. I may post a link to it.  My problem is that I
have no idea who actually did this.  They just call themselves
BriefSoftware, and I really like to put things like the actual
author's names on stuff I document.

Borland has been gradually releasing ancient stuff under a Community
license, and things like Turbo Pascal and Turbo C are available as a
free download and free to use. If memory serves, source is available
too, but of questionable use.  Good luck acquiring the proper
toolchain and being *able* to change and rebuild.it.

I recall Brief being promised, but not available the last time I
looked.  Should it *become* available. I\ll link to it on TextEditors/

> I also found WordStar but didn't see a download link on the wiki:
> http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WordStar

There *isn't* one.  WordStar was never formally made freeware.  It was
simply abandoned. Note that the WordStar.org site explicitly *states*
you will not find binaries there, and why..  It's front and center on
the site..

It *is* relatively easy to find unauthorized archives, install,
configure, and use it, but you won't find pointers to them on the WS
site. (You *will* find extensive discussion in the site forums on. how
to set it up and get it running on Windows10 using the open source
vDos Plus  emulator, vDos Plus is a fork of DOSBox, an open source,
cross platform DOS emulator, aimed a folks who want to play old DOS
games in things that *aren't* DOS PCs. I have it up here as proof of
concept.  It's not hard once you grasp a couple of underlying
concepts. :-)

DOSBox/vDosPlus provide enough DOS functionality to let you boot and
run DOS games on platforms that may not be PCs or use x86 CPUs.  The
big lack is the shell, which provides just enough functionality to
load and run the games. You can add that missing stuff with  FreeDOS
COMMAND, or 4DOS (my preference) and have a functional DOS emulator
which can load things like  TSRs

(It has no equivalent of CONFIG.SYS and cannot load drivers that
expect to be loaded in the boot process *before* DOS is loaded and
active. If your program requires that, you are SOL.)   Pretty much any
program that ran on a PC should run under 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:35 PM Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> the current Diskman website links to archive.org for some of
> the content and "inside" the archived website you can jump to
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206182142/http://www.diskman.co.uk/license.aspx
>
> Which contains the following, as of 2/2007, emphasis added by me:
[..]


Yes, that list raises a number of issues. To summarize what you quoted:

- freeware for non-commercial use (free for home users)
- commercial or military users need a license (can try it for up to 30 days)
- charities and non-commercial users need an agreement
- you cannot use for computer manufacture or "recovery" work
- you cannot distribute, except as the original file
- you cannot charge to distribute
- you cannot include on a download site without permission


So yes, that definitely doesn't allow FreeDOS to share a copy of Diskman.


> As you have already mailed the author, we should just wait whether he
> can offer the source code AND a more free license. I THINK the tool
> would be a rather nice addition to our collection :-)
>

Yes, I'll let you know if/when I hear back from him.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[dmccunney]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:17 PM Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Hi Dennis, I *love* your TextEditors.org site! Thanks for your work!

Thank you. I don't believe the site is high volume, but I don't care.
Every once in a while I get an email from someone thanking me because
TextEdiors provided info or a download for something they had been
looking for for a long time.  I smile happily.,. That's why I maintain
the site and what makes it with doing.

> Coincidentally, I was just this moment browsing 
> http://www.lanet.lv/simtel.net/msdos/editor-pre.html
> and it looks like all are broken links.

Likely because Simtel.net no longer exists.  I can usually find the
stuff in other repositories, but I don't know I have to till someone
like you points it out

Keeping links updated is an ongoing challenge I haven't usually got
the time to devote to.

My reference was simply explaining my thinking about licenses. I want
editors to be available.  I don't *care* what the license is.  What
the user does because of a license is up to them. I don't get to tell
them what to do, and *shouldn't*..

> -Thomas
>
> NB: Some authors of an earlier era still living up to the idea that holding 
> the software and/or source or sort-of-registration-process/registration fee 
> etc. might still yield some income. Software market dynamics have changed so 
> much since then (1990ies, DOS times) that more is lost then free the software 
> at least for archives to study, try, play or even work with it. Most of it is 
> of little commercial use on a large scale. (This should/could be read in the 
> light of the »FSF« ideas, too.)

If there are authors still attempting to monetize their work, and are
still actively supporting it when the user buys a license, I'm
thrilled.

I simply see a need for Freedos users to *find* them, starting from
the Freedos page.  Fine by me if that location isn't on Ibiblio,  but
there needs to be a pointer *from* the Freedos site to where it is.

> Maybe it would need a broader manifesto about this issue and distributed in 
> time before most of it is lost in digital oblivion? (See editor-list above 
> and many many other sites/links)

Possible.  I am all about preserving software and data like this.  I
am *not* fussy about the method.  I am only concerned that it *works.*
__
Dennis


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:00 PM dmccunney  wrote:
>[..]
> You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.
>
> Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
> *not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
> users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
> to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
> the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
> of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
> after about it?
>
> I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
> is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
> a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
> hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
> pocket calculator.
>
> Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
> shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
> docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
> Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
> one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
> abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
> registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
> fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
> because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.
>
> A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
> hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
> so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
> history.

Interesting wiki. I looked up BRIEF but didn't find a download link on the wiki:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Brief

I also found WordStar but didn't see a download link on the wiki:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WordStar

I found SEDIT (shareware) in the wiki, but the download link points to
a Simtel mirror owned by someone named Michael Scovetta:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SEDIT


When you say you'll "host" it even if it's proprietary software, do
you mean you actually have a copy of the editor on your site, and
people can download it from your site? Or do you mean "host" as
"there's an entry for it in the wiki"?

Putting an entry in a wiki is different than offering a file for
download. When you offer a file for download, you are distributing it.
And that gets into copyright territory.

Yes, I know that some of these programs are effectively "abandoned"
and the owners seem to be gone. But do you know if the owner is
actually gone? Or did someone else (perhaps another company) swoop in
and buy the rights? There are other examples where someone has
purchased the rights to some really old software, and then come back
to sue someone. For example, DR-DOS (Caldera). I don't want to
entangle FreeDOS in the next "Caldera" suit. Especially since we don't
have a "FreeDOS Foundation" to provide air cover. (Creating a
Foundation is expensive.)


>
> I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
> with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
> stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
> This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
> recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
> free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."
>
> My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
> software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
> don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
> should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
> somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.
>

Do you mean like the "Links" page on the FreeDOS website, that links
to (among other places) archives of shareware games and other
applications?
https://www.freedos.org/links/

>From my other emails a few weeks ago about updating the FreeDOS
website, I'm looking to move the "Links" content to other, more
visible landing pages. For example:
https://test.freedos.org/

And the https://test.freedos.org/about/games/ page (linked from the
"Play Games" info box on the front page) says this:

>On this page, we'll list a few cool games that you can run on
>FreeDOS. If it's gratis, we'll also provide links. Also include
>links to the games archives (from the Links page). [I think by
>including the content from the Links page into the other pages, I
>can probably do away with the Links page.]

And the https://test.freedos.org/about/apps/ page (linked from the
"Legacy Apps" info box on the front page) says this:

>On this page, we'll list a few cool and free (gratis)
>applications that you can download and run on FreeDOS. If it's
>gratis, we'll also provide links.


I think that's what you are suggesting. Or are you suggesting some
other 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim,

the current Diskman website links to archive.org for some of
the content and "inside" the archived website you can jump to

http://web.archive.org/web/20070206182142/http://www.diskman.co.uk/license.aspx

Which contains the following, as of 2/2007, emphasis added by me:

"- Diskman is licensed as freeware for non-commercial use. Anybody can
download it and use it free of charge, for any purpose they see fit,
provided that the following conditions are met:

- Diskman can only be used for non-commercial purposes ('commercial'
includes use *for profit making* activities, *military* purposes or
incorporation within *any product or service for which a fee is
levied*) without a license.

- Diskman is also available on commercial terms. To license Diskman for
your commercial purposes please contact the author with details of the
purpose that it will be used for. Diskman may be evaluated for
commercial purposes for a period of thirty days. Commercially licensed
versions of Diskman will clearly indicate that they have been licensed
and have a clear notice of the conditions that they have been
distributed under. In most cases Diskman will be licensed for commercial
use without a fee being levied but this remains at the authors absolute
discretion.

- Diskman may not be used during the manufacture of computers or for
mission critical recovery work (see the disclaimer) without the authors
permission.

- Diskman may be freely used by any home user for an indefinite period
of time provided that they either downloaded it directly from this
website or received it in the package available for download from this
website and not, under any circumstances, as part of a product or service.

- Diskman may usually be used, free of charge, by any charity or
non-commercial organisation (including law enforcement) subject to
agreement with the author.

- The program is *not to be distributed* in any form other than that
available for download from this website or directly from the author.
- The program may be distributed provided that no charge is made for
program and that any charges for distribution are only to cover
reasonable media costs (< US$10)

- *Diskman may not be included on any internet download site* other than
that provided by the Diskman website *without the prior permission* of
the author. It is acceptable to link to the Diskman website but not to
a specific download (it won't work anyway!).

- Some revisions of Diskman are still beta software and must therefore
be used with great care. Other versions of Diskman marked 'stable' will
have been tested for an extended period of time by a large number of
users. In either case the author accepts no liability for any damage
that use of Diskman may cause. Please see the disclaimer for further
details."

However, the CURRENT website just provides version 4.2(A3) last alpha
release and NO license page. It simply says:

"Diskman is no longer under development. The following downloads are
provided for historical reasons and are not provided with any support."

As you have already mailed the author, we should just wait whether he
can offer the source code AND a more free license. I THINK the tool
would be a rather nice addition to our collection :-)

Regards, Eric




___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Dennis, I *love* your TextEditors.org site! Thanks for your work! 
Coincidentally, I was just this moment browsing 
http://www.lanet.lv/simtel.net/msdos/editor-pre.html
and it looks like all are broken links. 

-Thomas

NB: Some authors of an earlier era still living up to the idea that holding the 
software and/or source or sort-of-registration-process/registration fee etc. 
might still yield some income. Software market dynamics have changed so much 
since then (1990ies, DOS times) that more is lost then free the software at 
least for archives to study, try, play or even work with it. Most of it is of 
little commercial use on a large scale. (This should/could be read in the light 
of the »FSF« ideas, too.)

Maybe it would need a broader manifesto about this issue and distributed in 
time before most of it is lost in digital oblivion? (See editor-list above and 
many many other sites/links)




> On Sat,20210501- week17, at 22:58, dmccunney  
> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:26 PM Jim Hall  wrote:
>> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
>> I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
>> software on the Ibiblio site.
> 
> You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.
> 
> Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
> *not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
> users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
> to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
> the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
> of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
> after about it?
> 
> I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
> is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
> a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
> hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
> pocket calculator.
> 
> Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
> shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
> docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
> Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
> one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
> abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
> registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
> fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
> because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.
> 
> A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
> hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
> so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
> history.
> 
> I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
> with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
> stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
> This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
> recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
> free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."
> 
> My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
> software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
> don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
> should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
> somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.
> 
>> Jim
> ___
> Dennis
> 
> 
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:25 PM Eric Auer  wrote:
>[..]
> > I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
> > http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme
> > file, running the program prints this notice:
> >
> >> Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE...
>
> The list of versions (on the website, viewed through
> archive.org, as written) also suggests that, but how
> about the most recent stable release 4.x instead then?
>

The notice I copied into my last email was the output from the latest
version on the Diskman website. If you visit http://www.diskman.co.uk/
you'll see there's only one version available to download. Here's the
text from the website:

>
> Diskman4 (1999-2004)
>
> Diskman was a non-commercial DOS-based software project I
> developed from 1999-2004. The last release was Diskman4.
>
> Diskman is no longer under development. The following downloads
> are provided for historical reasons and are not provided with any
> support.
>
> (icon) Diskman4.2(A3) Last Release
>


> If the website still is active, the software may
> still be freeware for non-commercial, non-violent
> use BUT shareware for the rest, which might be an
> issue for fitting it into our licensing policies?
>

(Interesting that you say "non-violent use" .. I didn't see that in
the license. Maybe you meant something else?)

Yes, that would be an issue. While the license says that you "may be
used freely for non-commercial purposes" it also says "may not be
copied, distributed, modified, or incorporated within any product or
service." That means we can't distribute it from Ibiblio.

And including Diskman (with this license) in the FreeDOS distribution
is a non-starter. We know that some people use FreeDOS commercially
(for example, you can still buy new laptops and PCs that have FreeDOS
pre-installed). Including Diskmam (with this license) in the
distribution means commercial users cannot use this program. That
would effectively "poison" FreeDOS for commercial users, which is not
good.

We used to include a few "closed source but free to use and
distribute" programs in FreeDOS, but we've also been burned a few
times by that. I don't want to go through that again. That's why I'm
so focused that any future FreeDOS should only include open source
software.

Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Eric,

> interesting that the DISKMAN website just WORKED.
> The idea to view it using archive.org came from
> Robert, maybe it did not work from his area? Odd.

It's not odd:
In private mail, at first, I cited something from
.
Then I sent two archive.org links, because that's exactly how they
appear in the "Useful Links" section at .

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: https://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead: https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[dmccunney]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:26 PM Jim Hall  wrote:
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
> >
> > Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
> I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
> software on the Ibiblio site.

You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.

Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
*not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
after about it?

I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
pocket calculator.

Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.

A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
history.

I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."

My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.

> Jim
___
Dennis


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim,

interesting that the DISKMAN website just WORKED.
The idea to view it using archive.org came from
Robert, maybe it did not work from his area? Odd.

> I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
> http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme
> file, running the program prints this notice:
> 
>> Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE...

The list of versions (on the website, viewed through
archive.org, as written) also suggests that, but how
about the most recent stable release 4.x instead then?

If the website still is active, the software may
still be freeware for non-commercial, non-violent
use BUT shareware for the rest, which might be an
issue for fitting it into our licensing policies?

> That's a live website, so you don't need to point to the Archive.org
> copy of the website.
> 
> There's a "Contact me" form at the bottom of his website, and I have
> just submitted a request there to ask if he would be willing to
> release Diskman under an open source software license. I pointed James
> to the OpenSource Initiative's website and their list of open source
> licenses.

Thanks! Regards, Eric

PS: I had encountered it when searching ibiblio for file managers,
partition managers and system info tools. Laaca just told me that
*DOS Navigator* is quite okay as file manager AND has a reasonable
system info feature :-) That and DOSZIP commander are the two file
managers which we have in our 1.2 ibiblio collection at the moment.

PPS: Making dozens of version-subdirectories cannot have been more
work than normalizing (within-package only!) versioned zip names ;-)



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>
> Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
>
> https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/disk/dm/
>
> which has only bare binaries inside. So I wondered what it is.
> Now Robert, who says I should not thank him, has found the URL
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070208031008/http://www.diskman.co.uk/about.aspx
>
> which gives a comprehensive answer to the question :-)
>
> DM means DISKMAN and is a (also scriptable) tool which can
> backup/restore LFN, quickformat FAT12/16/32, manage, read,
> write and mount disks, partitions and images of those, DOS
> and BIOS style, including a raw disk editor and some extras
> like CMOS backup/restore and a little bit of NTFS. Newest
> version would be 4.x, while we have 2.0 and 2.1 archived.
>[..]
> What are your thoughts on this? It SOUNDS useful to ME,
> so if somebody has time, they could recursively fetch a
> bunch of documentation from the website and throw it into
> an updated ZIP for ibiblio. The author hints that source
> code could be made available on request.

I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
software on the Ibiblio site.

I downloaded Diskman and ran it on FreeDOS. One version barfed on
FreeDOS and wouldn't run (possibly because it's under QEMU?) The
version that ran printed a message that the software cannot be
distributed without written permission. That means we cannot put it on
Ibiblio.

I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme file, running
the program prints this notice:

>Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE
>
>This software may not be copied, distributed, modified, or incorporated within
>any product or service without the written permission of the copyright holder
>This software may be used freely for non-commercial purposes. Please visit
>www.diskman.co.uk for commercial terms. Most commercial licenses restrict
>the use of this program to a single machine/user. Unless the license states
>otherwise only one copy of this software may be used at any instance without
>the purchase of additional licenses. This software is supplied `as is' and
>the author accepts no liability for damage this program causes through either
>unexpected operation or intended misuse. This program may only be used if you
>consent to the above conditions.
>
>Visit www.diskman.co.uk for more information

So that notice is very clear, we cannot distribute Diskman. I have
pulled Diskman from Ibiblio.

>
> While there is no address mentioned on diskman.co.uk on
> archive.org, the binary contains the addresses debug@...
> and jim@... with ... being the mentioned domain, which
> makes it tricky to contact the author on his gone domain:
> "James Clark, an electronics engineer, working for a
> leading UK computer manufacturer"
>

Running Diskman on FreeDOS also prints the website URL:
http://www.diskman.co.uk/

That's a live website, so you don't need to point to the Archive.org
copy of the website.

There's a "Contact me" form at the bottom of his website, and I have
just submitted a request there to ask if he would be willing to
release Diskman under an open source software license. I pointed James
to the OpenSource Initiative's website and their list of open source
licenses.

Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"

https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/disk/dm/

which has only bare binaries inside. So I wondered what it is.
Now Robert, who says I should not thank him, has found the URL

http://web.archive.org/web/20070208031008/http://www.diskman.co.uk/about.aspx

which gives a comprehensive answer to the question :-)

DM means DISKMAN and is a (also scriptable) tool which can
backup/restore LFN, quickformat FAT12/16/32, manage, read,
write and mount disks, partitions and images of those, DOS
and BIOS style, including a raw disk editor and some extras
like CMOS backup/restore and a little bit of NTFS. Newest
version would be 4.x, while we have 2.0 and 2.1 archived.

Version 3 was the start of a clean-up with limited, but
more stable features and 4 is quite similar to 2.1 as far
as features are explained, but more clean and stable :-)

The website also features a manual, a reference guide, FAQ,
various examples and, in the news section, a list of known
issues and planned changes. Version 4 is from 2002, while
version 2 is from the year 2000.

What are your thoughts on this? It SOUNDS useful to ME,
so if somebody has time, they could recursively fetch a
bunch of documentation from the website and throw it into
an updated ZIP for ibiblio. The author hints that source
code could be made available on request.

While there is no address mentioned on diskman.co.uk on
archive.org, the binary contains the addresses debug@...
and jim@... with ... being the mentioned domain, which
makes it tricky to contact the author on his gone domain:
"James Clark, an electronics engineer, working for a
leading UK computer manufacturer"

Thanks! Regards, Eric

PS: Interesting observation: The Stallman support movement
seems to have >1/3 eastern supporters. Cultural difference?



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user