Can someone clarify which precise files are 'widgets' (as being discussed)?
> We have been distributing widgets with every release of > DynAPI. That makes > them part of the DynAPI, which in turn is licensed under GNU > Public license. > =;^) > > I believe some basic widgets are an integral part of DynAPI. > With out them, > the core files are an over engineered piece of JavaScript functions. I > wonder how many people would continue to use DynAPI without some basic > widgets? This will destroy DynAPI. We will lose our audience. > I feel very > strongly about this. =;^| > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Doug Melvin > Sent: November 27, 2001 11:36 AM > To: Laszlo Teglas; Dynapi-Dev@lists. sourceforge. net > Subject: Re: [Dynapi-Dev] DynAPI Documents - Structural Candidate 1 > > > actually, the widgets area NOT part of the DynAPI. > Thus they are not covered. > Only changes made to the 'core' ie; dynapi.js,dynlayer.js > are covered. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Laszlo Teglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Dynapi-Dev@lists. sourceforge. net" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 10:32 AM > Subject: [Dynapi-Dev] DynAPI Documents - Structural Candidate 1 > > > > 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]/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > _______________________________________________ Dynapi-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
