On 11/22/2014 09:46 PM, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 07:34:36PM -0200, Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro wrote:
>> Em Sat, 22 Nov 2014 12:17:34 +0000
>> David Mackay <davidj...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>>>> If you are the copyright holder that can't possibly be a concern!
>>>> Just ignore the violations. Being the copyright holder, only you can
>>>> enforce the license.
>>>> So don't prosecute them --- it's virtually the same, and that's all.
>>> Failure to prosecute every and all violation of licence leads to the
>>> licence becoming nullified on the grounds that the copyright holder
>>> doesn't care enough to protect their rights.
>> That may be true for non-trivial licenses like GPLv3, but that's
>> hardly the case for very permissive licenses (like X11's), as they are
>> almost virtually identical to the public domain.
> And this is your defense of your argument that I could just use a
> copyleft (ie, nontrivial) license and not enforce it, rather than
> using a permissive license?
> You're trying to have it both ways, or forgetting what you're
> arguing for.
>
> Anyhow, *I* believe that a license shouldn't require something if it
> won't be enforced; a license is a moral document as well as legal.
>
> If I don't consider it *wrong* to distribute the software in a given way,
> my license should not call it wrong.
>
> That doesn't automatically work the same in negation; similarly,
> the principle that if I don't consider it wrong to use the software
> in a given way, the license should not forbid using it in that way
> does not mean that I should forbid any use of the software that I do
> consider wrong.
>
>>> On the topic of the Autotools: I do hope we will steer as far clear
>>> from autotools as possible.
>> I'm sorry to hear it.
>>
>>
>>> with software projects abandoning autotools en-masse owing to its
>>> complicated nature and a plethora of technical faults, this would be
>>> a regression.
>> That's not so in the view of the GNU project and in the context of the
>> GNU operating system.
> Well, CDE isn't part of the GNU project or the GNU operating system.
> You're welcome to port it, if you wish; "GNU/Linux" support works
> fairly well.
>
> Outside GNU software, cmake is fairly popular.
> And outside the GNU operating system and its close relatives
> (which happens to be where you're promising *better* portability),
> autotools breaks frequently.
> Even having a six-year mismatch between autotools and a GNU/Linux distro,
> or using busybox instead of coreutils, will frequently cause breakage.
> The OpenBSD port maintainer has referred to problems with autotools
> being a major issue.
> A user wrote this, just upthread:
> | But honestly, coming from someone who has spent a good part of the
> | last decade doing porting to IRIX, HP-UX, OpenVMS, Tru64 UNIX, QNX,
> | and god knows what other shenanigans: try to avoid autotools. It's
> | a huge frickin mess that is virtually impossible to trace/debug/fix
> | if it goes nuts (and it goes nuts way too often).
>
> The evidence would seem to be pretty clear that autotools does *not*
> make it easier to port software to obscure platforms in net:
> while the code may be more portable, the build system is less so.
>
> Thanks for reading,
> Isaac Dunham
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
> from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
> with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
> Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> cdesktopenv-devel mailing list
> cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel
Even though I prefer the GPLv3 and like the GNU Project, I have to
agree, GNU Autohell is a mess and should be avoided. I was actually
worried when I heard about these guys using it with their fork of CDE.
CMake is a much better choice.
--
Pouar
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
cdesktopenv-devel mailing list
cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel
