I have started to create the documents we have been talking about. My initial work can be viewed here:
http://www.interlog.com/~ccsi/DynAPI-Docs/docs/ This is just the structural layout that we agreed on. A lot of work is required to complete it still. What I am looking for is feed back on the structure, not the minor details at this point. Does this document structure make sense? Is this something that our users would appreciate. I used frames as agreed to cut down on maintenance of the docs. This way the docs are independent of the interface. Now to some disturbing news: Dan has recently announced, "But note, for 2.6 I'm re-assuming ownership of the widgets I write - no one seems to really want to maintain other peoples widgets anyway. I've rewrote them and will be selling them (for commercial use, free for non-commercial use) separately from DynAPI. This of course won't stop others from using 2.6 for their own widgets." Widgets are an integral part of DynAPI. With out them, the core files are an over engineered piece of JavaScript functions. To think that the next release will be without a free set of widgets is chilling. A lot of us like to fool around with DynAPI as "non-commercial" users, but this does not put food on our tables. Most of us are developers on contract who use Open Source products such as DynAPI to create websites. When we charge our customers we charge them for creating the layout of there sites and put some content in it, we don't charge them for using DynAPI. That would be against the GNU license. Dan I appreciate everything you have done for DynAPI, you have put a lot of work into it, but if your intent was to make money off of this work, then you should not have relieved your work as Open Source. The very reason you have all these followers is because DynAPI is Open Source. I have used it for that very reason my self. And in order to repay the DynAPI community for all their work, I decided to pitch in some of my time to create documentation. I am not sure, if I want to continue doing that if at a later time DynAPI will be hijacked for profit. Furthermore, I am not a lawyer, but I believe what you are doing is against section 2c of the GNU General Public License under which DynAPI is distributed. It reads as follows: "2) You may modify your copy or copies of the Library or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Library, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: c) You must cause the whole of the work to be licensed at no charge to ALL third parties under the terms of this License." Dan I know you are putting a lot of work into this. We all appreciate it. But you can't change the terms of the license on the fly. There are a lot of developers who have donated their time to this cause and accepted the terms of the license, which forbids them of making a profit on ANY modifications they contribute to the Library. With regret, but not as enemies, NanoFace =;^( _______________________________________________ Dynapi-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
