Le 10/05/2012 00:22, Jonathan M Davis a écrit :
On Wednesday, May 09, 2012 23:47:57 deadalnix wrote:
Le 09/05/2012 23:31, Joseph Rushton Wakeling a écrit :
On a more practical level, the inability of 3rd parties to distribute
DMD could have an effect in limiting points of access to the software,
with corresponding effects on the possible channels of contribution. The
ability to scale up the number of distribution and contribution channels
is going to be increasingly important as D develops.
And even more practical : I can't bundle dmd with an IDE for D to
provide an easy setup for a user. I can't create a repository where dmd
sit in to make it easy t install on linux. This make it harder for
beginner to get started with D.
I can't even fork dmd. And this is probably the most important one.
FOSS typically work in a dictatorship manner. This is ok, because the
dictator HAVE TO do the right thing, or the project will fork and a new
dictator will take the lead.
Having a non open source compiler as reference implementation is a major
issue. Unless you are microsoft, google or some other huge company, you
can't afford that.
Walter is arming his baby by trying to protect it.
Umm. No. While Walter is the original creator of the backend, it was owned by
the company that released it (Zortech) not him. Semantec bought Zortech, so
they own the compiler. Digital Mars uses it with their permission (via
licensing or leasing or whatever they did). So, Walter is bound by the license
that Semantec uses for the backend.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zortech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Mars
Walter can give redrisribution permissions if you ask (which he typically does
quite freely), but I don't believe that he can give blanket permissions, and
he definitely can't change the license. He's tried. As I understand it, if
Walter could make the backend GPL, he would, but he can't.
- Jonathan M Davis
Understood. That is quite sad.
