> Uli : Alain, it is true that we need a working
> infrastructure, but as we have seen few results thus
> far (as you had to re-create the whole system from
> scratch after the thief's actions), we overlooked it
> somewhat.
Alain : I am not upset. I was simply making a point.
> Uli : I'm glad you had the time to work on it and that
> the Server is now coming back. I'm also happy as this
> means we'll soon have more of you on the lists again
Alain : You're too kind. Thank you.
> Uli :(you were sort of "out of business" for a while).
> So, glad to have you (and the server <smirk>) back!
Alain : The reports of my demise were greatly exagerated! ;-)
> Anthony : Well, the licencing issue is pretty much a
> non-issue presently: The people who write the stuff
> will decide a licence. I can't force Uli -- and should
> not be able for force -- to accept the LGPL, and
> similarly no one can force me -- or should be able to
> force me -- to accept a clause forbidding sale of my
> Interpreter.
> Uli : Of course, but the trouble comes when we plug
> them all together. The differing licenses may cause us
> to drop a certain implementation ... So, it'd be good
> if we made clear what license everything developed for
> OC will be under.
Alain : Hear! Hear! Let's not put this off until later.
> Uli : Technically I don't mind even a PD license, but
> I'd feel much better if we had a license that makes
> sure everyone who uses OC (be it that he DLed it from
> the UFP site or bought it on CD-ROM) can add to it and
> look at the sources to fix bugs, ...
Alain : I am pretty sure that we all agree on this point. Otherwise we
would not call ourselves an Open Source collaboration. The only
sensitive issue in this regard is the obligation or not to release all
of the code modifications that a developer does, even portions that the
developer considers a strategic advantage.
> Uli : ...and I also want people to be able to use
> OpenCard to create commercial applications of the
> caliber of Myst.
Alain : This is precisely the clause that I am the most ardent about. I
insist that we adopt this clause ; otherwise I would be wasting my time
and, also, the resources of my business that I am contributing to this
effort.
> Uli : PD would be a bit weak in that it'd allow people
> to compile OC and sell it w/o the sources and w/o a
> note where they can get the sources. So, if we added a
> clause that the URL of the UFP web site had to be
> included and maybe a "Made with OpenCard" logo ... I'd
> be a happy camper. Or we could require people who
> distribute OpenCard to ship along the sources (at
> least the original ones they based their work on).
Alain : Agreed. PD is out.
Alain : We might also want to consider a clause that prohibits certains
uses that would be prejudicial to our reputations, and so on. It might
seem a little bit odd to bring this up, but it is a standard part of an
author's rights.
> Anthony : The programmers, artists, etc. who have
> their actual intellectual property in OpenCard
> obviously have to agree on some terms under which to
> put OpenCard out, but that's long into the future.
> Uli : Well, artists of sample stacks could just
> copyright the stack (including the graphics)...
Alain : Contributions may not always be so modular.
> Uli : ... but as real Open Source everything that's
> part of OpenCard should be free for personal use.
Alain : Good point, but ... does "personal use" include the use of
OpenCard to author something that could be commercialized ?
> Uli : Of course, we could provide special licenses for
> icons, graphics etc. which only allows that they be
> used in an OpenCard stack, and nowhere else ?
Alain : The number of licences to obtain for a complete project would
probably be discouragingly high.
> Uli : I don't think people won't create quality if
> they don't get money out of it.
Alain : I believe that people are inherently creative, and would work
even if, hypothetically, money was no longer in the picture. Like in
Star Trek !
> Uli : But the main thing is true: Most of the people
> working on OC are doing this because they want to get
> back what HyperCard was/is to them. So, I agree that
> both commercial interests and community spirit are
> important here. But to have everyone gain from this,
> OpenCard has to be free. Everybody contributes and
> what they get from that is OpenCard and what they can
> do with OC. Nothing more, except maybe experience and
> their name in the about box.
Alain : Well said.
Alain : For me, HyperCard is an authoring system. An easy-to-use
toolkit for the development of value-added solutions. By working
together on this toolkit, and by adopting a long-term strategy (versus
a short-term one), we can give ourselves (and the World) a development
toolkit that will augment everyone's potential for creating
computer-based content, in terms of quantity, quality, relevance, etc.
And, ultimately, content is what it is all about anyway.
Alain : Not to mention the fact that Open Source, in conjunction with
the Internet, is an economic and socio-political phenomenon of great
interest. When you get (federations of) small groups of people to
assemble, communicate, and collaborate together, efficiently and
democratically, "shit" happens ! It may even set the stage for the
beginning of a new social order based on some form of participatory
democracy. It may sound a little bit far-fetched, I suppose, but one
should not under-estimate the impact of new media in the shaping of our
societies. If in doubt, then read Marshall McLuhan (Global Village and
so much more). And, if you're REALLY interested, I can provide you with
other notable sources of inspiration for your reading pleasure. Just
ask.
Alain Farmer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
