On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:45:47 +0200
"Jorge Luis Zapata Muga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I dont pretend to start a flamewar, if you do, please dont answer this
> thread.The thing is that right now, the EFL has arrived to a place
> where different companies are using this software, and several of us
> are working on a company using the efl (raster, gustavo, cedric, me,
> anyone else?).
Me?
> >From a closed source company POV, BSD license is great because they
> dont need to give us anything back (fancypants example?);
I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that FST (ie FancyPants)
doesn't give anything to the community.
I personally have contributed[1] (on company time, with company
approval) in the past 12 months, bug reports, bug fixes, compilation
fixes, a rendering engine and given a talk on e17 related technologies
at LCA. There are other contributions, not all code, and not all is on
the public record for a variety of reasons - especially the fact I
know I can save time by emailing people patches and other comments
directly.
I can think of another individual who did a lot of work on
evas, ecore & edje in 2003 on FSTs time (with full company backing).
FST doesn't make a large song and dance about these contributions -
maybe we should if people think we are just taking a free ride? However
I personally think doing it without making a fuss is much healthier for
the community in the long term (this goes for the other companies who
contribute to e17 as well).
On the flip side it's not a secret that we use e17 technologies in our
products, _all_ our customers (for those products) are aware of this,
and not just something buried in a README.txt either.
> companies that do want to build an opensource initiative based on the
> EFL, BSD is not so great, because their code can be stolen from
> others; so whats your opinion on this?
Well to be frank, even if we never gave a single line of code back
(which as I just said, we have), it still wouldn't be stealing.
FST (and I personally) take our licencing obligations very seriously.
We do follow the licence requirements for the parts of e17 we use, the
original author is well aware of the fact we use the software, and how
we use it. In fact it was his original suggestion (and he had to
convince quite a few people here) that FST use the technology.
Regards,
nash
[aka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[1] I don't want to turn this into a contest on number of lines or any
such garbage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
