Erich,
thank you for clarifying!
On 24.03.2020 19:30, Erich Steinböck wrote:
> ooRexx only accepts Common Public License v1.0
> You are providing your rgf_util2.rex under ASF 2.0
Removed the AL 2.0, cf. [r12007].
---
/Please note: whatever AL 2.0 licensed, Rexx related software has been authored
by me will hereby be
licensed in addition under the CPL (Common Public License) v1.0. /
---
There is one principal question in the context of tools though.
The genesis of the above was as follows: while starting to overhaul the freshly
split rexxpg book I
noticed that not only was the text barely marked-up, but also that some parts
needed updates that
depend on the version of ooRexx from time to time, in this case the available
classes and the class
hierarchy.
Rather than updating the class hierarchy in the xml file manually I wrote a
little Rexx script that
would ask ooRexx about its classes (in doing so I stumbled over a crash-bug
that has been corrected
in the meantime) and have the subclasses always in sorted order by the class'
id. This is a little
tool and I did not want to invest too much time beyond its purpose so I used my
"rgf_util2.rex"
package as it inlcudes a MessageComparator class that allows one to sort data
of any type in any
sequence by sending it appropriate messages.
In this case ooRexx Class objects had to be sorted by their name "ID". So using
the
MessageComparator this was just plain simple:
...
msgComparator=.messageComparator~new("id / i") -- use id value, sort
case-independently
do subClz over clz~subClasses~sortWith(msgComparator)
... do whatever is needed ...
end
...
Or with other words: using the "rgf_util2.rex" package made the sorting of
ooRexx Classes plain
simple, in addition it helped saving me some coding time, hence using it.
Everything at that point
was located on my PC.
Then, later, thinking of some comments in the rexxref book where parts seemed
to had been created
using tools (indicated by text like GENERATED together with the date of the
generation) that cannot
be found anymore, I thought it to be a good idea for future updates to make
this little tool
available to the documentation project so anyone could use it reliably from
then on.
After communicating this idea I created the docs/trunk/tools/rexxpg directory
and copied the script
"createClassHierarchy.rex" and as a service its required package
"rgf_util2.rex", such that
everything is in place to run the script immediately.
"rgf_util2.rex" was put under the Apache License 2.0 (as all of the BSF4ooRexx
related code) as I
have been on the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) and using ASF's BSF (bean
scripting framework)
which I maintain since then (I became a member of the ASF, which is possible by
invitation from ASF
members and after an election only).
For ASF code it is important to put it under the AL 2.0 license such that it
can be safely and
blindly used in any ASF project. (Any code that one authors can be put under
more than one license
in parallel (without losing the copyright), if the author so wishes.)
It has been my understanding that tools using AL 2.0 license do not impose any
threats whatsoever to
CPL 1.0 etc software. Hence, I did not even think that AL 2.0 would pose a
problem to ooRexx. it is
my understanding that one could even freely use and incorporate such AL 2.0
code into CPL 1.0
projects without any negative side effects.
---
Now turning to tools for ooRexx in general in the light of all of this: I had
suggested that once
Gil has finalized his great work on the documentation tool chain, that we
should store his toolchain
with the documentation, such that anyone who wants to help the ooRexx project
in the documentation
area would be able to do so immediately by just downloading Gil's package and
after studying his
readme1st.txt file.
As we are in need and seeking helping hands it is important to make helping as
easy as possible,
also in the documentation area.
If we look at the mix of tools there are all sorts of licenses that get used
there. AFAICS at the
moment no single license there would pose a problem on the ooRexx project.
So my question is: what about tools that are needed to create the documentation
that do not license
CPL 1.0, but use licenses that do not infect the ooRexx license, can the be
hosted with appropriate
attribution in the ooRexx project?
---rony
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 7:14 PM Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at
> <mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at>> wrote:
>
> Hi Erich,
>
> On 22.03.2020 11:56, Erich Steinböck wrote:
> > I agree with Gil. Let's stay with our current coding/tagging style and
> the typographic
> conventions.
> I concur as well, see my follow-up to Gil's mail.
> > Also, rgf_util2.rex is unacceptable for inclusion in our svn. Please
> fix the copyright or
> remove
> > it from the svn, and please also do so for any other of your current or
> future commits.
>
> What is the problem (I really do not understand)? What constitutes a
> "fix"?
>
> ---rony
>
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
